

















V^ 




%,^^ 






^^•n^. 






.,^^^ /,^\ V,.^^ a;(<\VA". "^^ A^ ..»'^'. -^^^ C^-^ /A^ 







^0 ■>_ " 



^°-nK V 




.^^ o_ 














^0 



,0 



"> 



■.^'% \^" /\ °^^" ,^'^- 



*bV' 



^°-;^. 











,* .v^^ -^^^ -^y^^^/ ^4^ '^^. -.c 



0. 




o * 
\^ .. '*' 



,0 





-^^^^ 










o V 



.0 



X „ , . « ■^• 







" A^ 







0^ ^^^ --• .V- 

,^ -.-e-^"'/ ^-^"^ "^ ^^K*° <,^'' "^j. °''?^^ 




^oV" 



^°-% 




■o' 










<*> 



',.^^v^ -0_ ^^^x, ^ 



.^■ 













4 o^ 




^. 



^^ '"-- "^-^ "" .o^^-J^%'•^-/-^^*\.:^»C'^<.^^•'\o^^.-->o;°•'>.^^ 



-*bv"^ 



^^ 



-^^ 

















<> *'. 







^oV 



^°-n^. V 







-^ >. ^:^T'' ^^t' 







'A- ^°^>^' °- /\-^<X c°\c^^"°o /'.^;,% 



4 o^ 



^"^ A>^^ ' : 



4 Ov. 



■^ 






4 o^ 



^"■^^. V. 



%>-, 



.^^ 




■^-K a"* •■ , 













'^ 






> ^'.^^ ■^.^,_ %^P,^ ./■ %/^WY'^ A^^ "^. •^^>^ ./ \ °'' 



a\ 



^ 







'^'' c " " " - '<^ 



^^ *'V.^ 



A 










^^..9^' 

" A^"^ 
* -J.^ -^^ 



0' 







•f^^ 



"^ 



&'-.%. 0^ 



• A^^ 






0°.' 




-oV^ 




•^0^ 




•^oV 











V 






v' .♦•! 











^°-n^. 







,^ .... 



^-^.,^^'/jiS\X./ ''■ 












^-^ /• 



% 
•^ 




'> 



4 o>, 

v^ c . . ■** 




■^oV 



■rAQf 



A> » 



V^'' 



US'/ >^'X -^ 



•^ 














^0-n^ -''^p^; <ci°^ •" 




^oV^ 



iy-Ki. 







^^ *' . 











■\/ /^1 






A^ ^CD --r."'- A >^ •*,! 



%5frfsJ*'^" «5 '^ 




*© V .°^^ 



















50 






•: %-/ .'^^t %.^^' -ate-. \./ .-afe- %.** .*^l& 









^^ ... 



^,* ^^ ^^ o; 






V*^ 























<^ "^ 










'bV' 











/>>' v! 






























*^ o' 







■> -t. 







< o 




















> "V. 




<!\, - o . » - . u 



!^/'x^ap;^^'^ 







V.'i'^ 



1% 






.^^'\ 























"oV 



^^-•^K 











"^i 



o V 






v^' 






ili 



\.^^^ 






^°--^. 




'< -^--0^ 



•?'. 







.^ .•*«. -^z ..^-, *^^^^. ,j^, *. , 










..*^ 



*bV^ 







0^" c"""* % 



•^0^ 







.^^ 






«? "^ ■" ®i>3»t3 * a;^ •> 



^°-^<.. 










^•^°^ 



<^_ * 








ii 

























<^^^ ♦ = 







' ./"-^. '.^if/ j>% 






^* ^0 




° ^^'^°- 







^ 




% 



























\.^*"/^^-. "%.**'.-iS&X./- .' 









.,-Jv" .' 



A*" .-■ 






•^.=.0^ 
.^q^ 










.V "■> 



lO. 



.< o. 



IC 


8932 



Bureau of Mines Information Circular/1983 




Costs and Effects of Environmental 
Protection Controls Regulating 
U.S. Phosphate Rock Mining 



By Ronald F. Balazik 




UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 



Information Circular [8932 _ 



^-f M'A€C. j^ 



Costs and Effects of Environmental 
Protection Controls Regulating 
U.S. Phosphate Rock Mining 



By Ronald F. Balazik 




UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 
James G. Watt, Secretary 

BUREAU OF MINES 
Robert C. Horton, Director 



This publication has been cataloged as follows: 



/■-O 






^/' 



^ 



Balazjk, Ronald F 

Costs and effects of environmental protection controls regulating 
U.S. phosphate rock mining, 

(Information circular / Bureau of Mines ; 8932) 

Bibliography: p. 35-37. 

Supt. of Docs, no.: I 28.27:8932. 

1. Phosphate industry— United States— Costs. 2, Phosphate indus- 
try—Environmental aspects— United States. 1. Title. II. Title: US 
phosphate rock industry. III. Series: Information circular (United 
States. Bureau of Mines) ; 8932. 



-TN295.U4 [HD9585.P483U5] 622s [338.2'31 83-600021 



■^ 

^ CONTENTS 

ri Page 

Oi 

~^Abstract 1 

--- Introduction 2 

Acknowledgments 2 

Chapter 1. — Domestic phosphate rock mining: status, environmental Impacts, and 

regulatory Issues 3 

Industry Status 3 

Relevant mining operations 5 

Excavation 5 

Benef Iclatlon 6 

Final preparation 8 

Pertinent issues 8 

Land disturbance 8 

Water contamination 8 

Water consumption 9 

Air pollution 9 

Radiation 9 

Reclamation 9 

Chapter 2. — Environmental laws and regulations 10 

Environmental impact assessments 10 

Federal 10 

State 10 

Air quality standards 11 

Federal 11 

State 11 

Water quality standards 12 

Federal 12 

State 13 

Land use and land management laws 14 

Federal 14 

State and local government 15 

Mine reclamation regulations 16 

Federal 16 

State 16 

Potential environmental controls 19 

Solid waste regulations 19 

Radiation standards 19 

Additional local government controls 20 

Chapter 3. — The cost of environmental protection controls 21 

Environmental assessment costs 21 

Air quality control costs 21 

Water quality control costs 22 

Cost of land-use restrictions 23 

Florida wetlands • 23 

The survey 23 

MAS evaluation 24 

Western Federal lands 24 

Mine reclamation costs 25 

Current and potential waste disposal costs 26 

^ Solid wastes 26 

~7^ Radioactive wastes 27 

~~r~ Mine permitting costs • 27 

. Cash expenditures 27 

^ Time requirements 28 



CONTENTS — Continued 



Page 



Chapter 4. — The impact of environmental protection controls 31 

Summary of regulatory effects 31 

Increased expenditures 31 

Resource restrictions 32 

Uncertainty and risk 33 

Conclusions 34 

References 35 

ILLUSTRATION 

1. Generalized diagram of U.S. phosphate rock mining operations 5 

TABLES 

1. U.S. phosphate rock reserves 4 

2. U.S. phosphate rock prices in 1981... 4 

3. Cost of complying with water quality standards for domestic phosphate rock 

mines in 1977 22 

4. Federal land ownership in States with significant phosphate rock produc- 

tion and reserves 25 

5. Cost of reclaiming various types of phosphate rock mine lands in Florida.. 26 

6. Reclamation costs at an Idaho phosphate rock mine 26 

7. Cost of applying for phosphate mine permits in Florida 28 

8 . Permits required for phosphate mining in Florida 29 

9. Permitting schedule for a new phosphate mine in Florida 30 

10. Major environmental control costs and total production expenditures for 

domestic phosphate rock mining -. 31 



COSTS AND EFFECTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION CONTROLS 
REGULATING U.S. PHOSPHATE ROCK MINING 

By Ronald F. Balazik ' 



ABSTRACT 

This Bureau of Mines study identifies and examines the costs of Feder- 
al, State, and local environmental protection controls on domestic phos- 
phate rock mining. The costs include the expenditures needed to comply 
with government regulations and the effects that these expenditures and 
regulations have on supply. The study analyzes costs of environmental 
impact assessments, air and water quality standards, reclamation laws, 
potential solid waste controls, and local government restrictions. In 
addition, an industry survey and the Bureau's Minerals Availability Sys- 
tem (MAS) are used to evaluate land management policies that restrict 
access to phosphate resources. Conclusions drawn from these analyses 
confirm that (1) domestic phosphate mining has incurred substantial con- 
trol costs and may be subject to significant new regulatory costs in the 
next several years, (2) certain environmental controls can discourage 
mining investment, (3) environmental policies governing land-use con- 
trols affect the disposition of sizable phosphate resources, and are key 
determinants in the development of those resources on the Federal do- 
main, and (4) environmental costs could diminish the competitiveness of 
domestic producers. 

'Minerals specialist. Division of Minerals Policy and Analysis, Bureau of Mines, 
Washington, DC. 



INTRODUCTION 



Phosphate rock2 miningS is one of the 
few U.S. mineral industries that satis- 
fies virtually all domestic demand and 
supplies a large export market as well. 
In fact, the United States is the world's 
leading producer of phosphate, an irre- 
placeable plant nutrient in agriculture. 
Regardless of its significance, however, 
phosphate mining has some adverse envi- 
ronmental impacts if not properly con- 
ducted. Public issues and concern re- 
garding these impacts are detailed in 
chapter 1. 

In response to concerns about envi- 
ronmental degradation. Federal, State, 
and local authorities have imposed regu- 
latory controls4 on domestic phosphate 
mining. These controls primarily set 
water quality standards, limit airborne 
emissions, and prescribe mine reclamation 
practices. Other controls restrict 
access to phosphate deposits and require 



impact assessments of proposed mining. 
The scope and cost of each existing and 
potential control in the phosphate mining 
industry is examined in chapters 2 and 3. 
These controls, however, entail many 
costs in addition to those borne by the 
industry and encompassed by this report. 

The costs identified in this report in- 
dicate that environmental protection con- 
trols have several immediate effects on 
domestic phosphate mining. The effects 
are as follows: (1) increase capital and 
operating expenses, (2) limit access to 
potentially important mineral resources, 
and (3) can discourage investment by 
introducing financial uncertainty and 
risk. Each of these effects and their 
consequences are analyzed in chapter 4. 
Conclusions drawn from the information 
presented herein are given at the end of 
this report. 



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 



For this study, the author received 
valuable technical advice and information 
from William F. Stowasser and John W. 
Sweeney of the Bureau of Mines. The 

— _ 

"^Phosphate rock is the commercial term 
for naturally occurring phosphate com- 
pounds usually found in the apatite min- 
erals group, generally expressed as 
Caio(P04, 003)5 (F, OH)2_3. 

•^This report covers mining operations 
from deposit excavation through ore bene- 
ficiation, and also includes mine recla- 
mation activities. The processing of 



author also thanks Anthony M. Opyrchal 
for his assistance in preparing this 
report. 

beneficiated ore at fertilizer plants and 
for other consumers is beyond the scope 
of this report. 

■^For this study, environmental protec- 
tion controls are defined as "government 
policies and regulations designed to pre- 
serve the natural features of a land- 
scape, including atmospheric, vegetation, 
and wildlife characteristics." 



CHAPTER 1. — DOMESTIC PHOSPHATE ROCK MINING: STATUS, 
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, AND REGULATORY ISSUES 



This chapter presents a brief descrip- 
tion of domestic phosphate rock mining 
that highlights mining operations and 
public issues relevant to environmental 
regulation of the industry. The descrip- 
tion is designed to serve as a background 
for the discussion and analysis In the 
chapters that follow. 

INDUSTRY STATUS 

The United States is the world's lead- 
ing producer of phosphate rock. More- 
over, phosphate rock mining is one of the 
few U.S. mineral industries that meets 
virtually all domestic demand for its 
product and is a major exporter as well. 
In 1981, the industry produced approxi- 
mately 54 million tonsS of marketable 
phosphate rock valued at $1.4 billion 
(31). Exports (primarily to Canada and 
Europe) totaled 11 million tons, while 
imports amounted to less than 14,000 tons 
(30). Imports accounted for less than 
1 percent of domestic consumption in 
1981, and averaged less than 3 percent of 
consumption throughout the 1970' s. 

Most of the phosphate rock mined in the 
United States is used to produce phos- 
phate fertilizers. These fertilizers 
provide phosphorus, which is essential to 
plant growth. Phosphate rock is virtu- 
ally the only source of phosphorus used 
as a plant nutrient; there is no practi- 
cal substitute on a commercial scale. 
Phosphate rock is also used in animal 
feed supplements, food additives, deter- 
gent compounds, insecticides, and other 
chemical products. 

Twenty-six mining companies, with a 
total emplojnnent of about 10,000 per- 
sonnel, accounted for all U.S. phosphate 
rock production in 1981 (30). Thirteen 

^Except where noted, "ton" in this re- 
port refers to metric ton (2,205 pounds). 



companies in North Carolina and Florida 
produced 87 percent of the total output 
(30). The remainder was produced in Ten- 
nessee (2 percent) and in Idaho, Alabama, 
Montana, and Utah (11 percent) (30). 
Nearly all of the phosphate rock mine 
properties in the Eastern States are pri- 
vately owned, whereas most of the proper- 
ties in the West are on public lands or 
are held by both government and private 
concerns. 

As might be expected, the geographic 
pattern of phosphate rock production in 
the United States reflects the distribu- 
tion of known deposits. Table 1 shows 
the location of phosphate rock reserves 
by State. Note that over two-thirds of 
the total reserves and reserve base are 
accounted for by only two States, Florida 
and North Carolina. 

Phosphate rock mining costs vary con- 
siderably throughout the country. Ore 
grade and depth, deposit impurities, 
plant age, and cost of equipment are some 
of the key variables affecting costs 
(31). The costs per ton of P2O5 product 
calculatedS in 1981 with the Bureau of 
Mines Minerals Availability System (MAS) 
are Florida and North Carolina, $10.73- 
$36.14; Tennessee, $15.91-$22.41 ; and 
Western States, $27.79-$41.31. 

Phosphate rock prices vary consider- 
ably, depending on factors such as mine 
location, product grade, and whether the 
rock is destined for domestic or foreign 
markets (31). Average phosphate rock 
prices for various producing areas are 
shown in table 2. 

"These calculations assume certain con- 
ditions, including a 15-percent return on 
investment, operation at full capac- 
ity, and a market available for all 
production. 



TABLE 1. - U.S. phosphate rock reserves, million tons (29) 





State 


Reserves 1 


Re 


serve base^ 


Florida 


546 

405 

21 

56 

224 




2 

1 


590 


North Carolina. ....................... 


290 


Tennessee, ............................ 


29 


Idaho. ..•........>....•............... 


235 


Utah. 


831 


Wyoming 

Montana 


690 
3 


Total3 


1,250 




5 


.660 



^ As shown in the MAS. These reserves cost less than $30 per 
ton to mine. Costs include capital, operating expenses, taxes, 
royalties (if applicable), and miscellaneous costs; a 15-percent 
rate of return on investment is also included. Costs and re- 
reserves are current as of January 1981. 

2The "reserve base," a concept developed jointly by the Bureau 
of Mines and the Geological Survey, comprises those parts of the 
resource that have a reasonable potential for becoming commercial 
and profitable to mine within planning horizons beyond those that 
assume proven technology and current economics. The reserve base 
includes reserves, marginal reserves, and some materials that are 
currently uneconomic. 

■^Data do not add to totals shown because of independent 
rounding. 



TABLE 2. - U.S. phosphate rock prices 
in 1981, dollars per ton, f.o.b. 
mine (30) 



Source 


Destination 




Domestic 


Export 


Florida and 

North Carolina 

Western States 


27.80 
19.91 
13.24 


37.26 
40.88 


Tennessee 





in the Western States are large, but sig- 
nificant amounts are located on Federal 
lands and environmentally sensitive areas 
where mining is likely to be- contested. 
Phosphate rock resources on the Eastern 
Outer Continental Shelf could prove to be 
another source of production. Neverthe- 
less, mining such resources may be costly 
and could require special environmental 
protection controls. 



Studies by the Bureau of Mines indicate 
that the domestic supply of phosphate 
should be adequate through the remainder 
of this century (29). As in every mining 
industry, however, new deposits of phos- 
phate rock must be developed if producers 
are to compensate for the depletion of 
existing mines. (Subsequent sections of 
this report show how the development 
of new deposits are affected by certain 
environmental protection policies.) The 
eventual depletion of phosphate mines 
that are currently operating could be 
partly offset by planned operations in 
Florida and North Carolina. In Ten- 
nessee, however, phosphate reserves may 
be exhausted by the year 2000. Reserves 



In addition to the need for new re- 
source development, the domestic phos- 
phate rock industry must face more 
aggressive production and marketing by 
foreign competitors, especially producers 
in North Africa and the Middle East (18). 
Moreover, the proliferation of environ- 
mental protection regulations has not 
encouraged new mine development. Foreign 
producers not subject to such regulations 
and the ensuing costs have a competitive 
advantage. In view of such costs and 
declining ore grade accompanied by grow- 
ing foreign competition, it is possible 
that the United States may no longer be a 
major phosphate rock exporter by the end 
of this century (31). 



RELEVANT MINING OPERATIONS 

Phosphate rock mining operations in the 
United States are outlined below, with an 
emphasis on those activities which have 
the greatest environmental impacts. As 
illustrated by the schematic diagram in 
figure 1, the major phosphate rock mining 
operations are categorized for discussion 
here as "excavation," "benef iciation, " 
and "final preparation. " 

Excavation 

Except for some underground mining in 
Montana, phosphate rock is surface mined 
in the United States. Regional varia- 
tions in excavation procedures occur due 
to a number of factors, principally geo- 
logic structure, deposit hardness, and 
ore depth. These geographic variations 
are as follows: 

Florida (57). — At a typical Florida 
mine, a dragline digs a series of 
parallel cuts several hundred to 



several thousand feet long and 200 
to 300 feet wide. The overburden is 
cast into the previously mined cut 
and the underlying ore is exposed. 
The ore is then mined and transferred 
to a slurry pit located above ground 
within reach of the dragline. In the 
slurry pit, large water guns deliver 
10,000 to 12,000 gallons of water 
per minute at a pressure of about 200 
pounds per square inch to break down 
the friable ore into a slurry for 
pumping to the central washing unit 
in the mill area. Each dragline usu- 
ally has its own associated pumping 
system. The ore is not completely 
recovered due to the irregularity of 
the contacts with the overburden or 
underlying bedrock and irregularity 
of the ore itself. Upper and lower 
contact losses can be significant. 
It is estimated that 85 to 95 percent 
of the ore is recovered from the cut. 

Shallow total mining depths of 
less than 60 feet and favorable 



EXCAVATION 



Strip or 

open pit 

mining 



BENEFICIATION 



Ore washing 

and 
beneficiation 



FINAL PREPARATION 




Drying 

(Generally for 

export only) 



Agglomeration 

(Western 

States and 

Tennessee) 



Grinding 



To 

fertilizer 
manufacture 



To 

elemental 

phosphate 

electric 

furnace 



FIGURE 1. - Generalized diagram of U.S. phosphate rock mining operations. (Based on 
various Bureau of Mines reports and on reference 46.) 



overburden-to-ore thickness ratios 
(in the range of 1:1) have made drag- 
line use for both stripping and ore 
extraction the standard method of 
mining. In more recent years , to- 
tal depths have increased, and 
overburden-to-matrix ratios have be- 
come less favorable, placing more 
demand on total digging capacity and 
greater reach to allow sidecast 
spoiling of the overburden without 
encroachment on the ore. Some pro- 
jected operations have average mining 
depths of 75 feet with maximum depths 
up to 110 feet. 

The strip mining practices just de- 
scribed have affected large areas of 
land. 7 However, all phosphate mine oper- 
ators are required to have reclamation 
programs. More than 70,000 acres of the 
mined land have been reclaimed to data 
( 13 ). The reclaimed lands are now being 
used for pastures, farms, citrus groves, 
residential and commercial development , 
pine forests, recreational areas, and 
wildlife refuges. 

North Carolina (31). — The mining pro- 
cedure is similar to that in Florida. 
A 30-inch hydraulic dredge removes 
the upper 40 feet of overburden. A 
72-cubic-yard dragline and 45-cubic- 
yard draglines are used to strip the 
remaining overburden and mine 40 feet 
of ore. A small dragline moves the 
ore to the sluice pit. 

Tennessee (31). — Ore in Tennessee is 
strip mined with 2- or 3-cubic-yard 
draglines. Blasting is not necessary 
to remove overburden or ore. Ore is 
trucked or shipped by rail to bene- 
ficiation plants. Loose clay over- 
burden averages 8 feet in thickness 
but may be 20 feet. Ore thickness 
averages 6 feet but may be up to 25 
feet. Ore is not mined if the ratio 
of overburden-to-ore exceeds 3:1. 



'In Florida alone, over 220,000 acres 
of land have been surface mined for phos- 
phate rock (6, 13). 



Western States (31). — Most of the 
mines in southeastern Idaho use con- 
ventional scrapers and bulldozers to 
remove overburden and mine the ore. 
However, power shovels are used in 
some locations to mine ore and remove 
overburden. In Montana, the ore is 
broken in the stopes and and removed 
through chutes into several adits. 
In Utah, the phosphate rock is quar- 
ried after an overlying limestone cap 
is drilled, blasted, and removed. 
Unlike most Eastern mines, ore mined 
in the Western States is transported 
by trucks or rail to benef iciation 
plants. Also, because of the drier 
climate in the West, more dust is 
generated by Western mining and haul- 
ing operations (46). 

Benef iciation 

Benef iciation is the term applied to 
the processes utilized to upgrade the 
phosphate rock ore and remove impurities. 
As with excavation procedures, benef ici- 
ation processes vary regionally, as shown 
below: 

Florida and North Carolina (31 ,46) . — 
Benef iciation of Florida and North 
Carolina ores varies from plant to 
plant, according to differences in 
grade and the size of different ore 
fractions. In both States, an ore 
slurry ranging from 20 to 50 percent 
solids is first sent through a se- 
ries of screens using "hammer mills" 
and "log washers," which enable 
phosphate-bearing materials to be 
separated from waste sand and clay. 

A typical Florida benef iciation unit 
involves a preliminary wet screening 
to separate a fraction called pebble, 
which is smaller than one-quarter 
inch and larger than 14 mesh, from 
the balance of the ore. In some 
cases, pebble product is then sent to 
a rock dryer. In North Carolina, the 
ore does not contain pebble. In 
Florida and North Carolina benefici- 
ation processes, the ore fraction 
smaller than 14 mesh is slurried and 



treated by one- or two-stage "flota- 
tion," which utilizes chemical re- 
agents in conjunction with aeration 
to selectively separate suspended 
particles. The special environmental 
problems associated with the disposal 
and storage of solid and liquid 
wastes generated by the flotation- 
benef iciation process is discussed 
below, immediately following the re- 
maining State summaries. 

Tennessee (46). — A representative 
Tennessee benef iciation plant uses a 
log washer to slurry the ore and 
break up large agglomerated masses. 
This operation is followed by 
size classification using hydrocy- 
clones. The product-size fraction is 
then sent to nodulizing kilns where 
it is prepared for use in electric 
arc furnaces to produce elemental 
phosphorus. 

Western States ( 32 , 46). — Individual 
Western benef iciation plants incor- 
porate a variety of size classifica- 
tion and flotation processes. Thus, 
there is no "standard" benef iciation 
procedure for the ores. However, 
Western benef iciation plants gener- 
ally include a primary crushing step 
to reduce the size of the ore to less 
than one-quarter inch. This size 
reduction is accomplished in several 
steps, the last of which is a slurry- 
grinding process, which uses a wet 
rod mill to reduce the ore to par- 
ticles about the size of beach sand. 
The slurry may be size-classified 
in hydrocyclones , using centrifugal 
force to separate product-size mate- 
rial from the tailings (clay and sand 
particles smaller than about 100 
mesh) . The ore is then filtered from 
the slurry and conveyed to fur- 
ther processing. The tailings are 
discarded. 

The large volume of water typically 
used to slurry and beneficiate phosphate 
rock has raised concerns about effects on 
land and water resources in the mining 
regions. An average of 10,000 gallons of 
fresh and recycled water is utilized to 



process each ton of ore produced in the 
Eastern States, while about 2,000 gallons 
are used per ton of output at Western 
mines (18) . Although up to 90 percent of 
this water is eventually reclaimed, 
the effects of phosphate mining on the 
depletion of ground water aquifers has 
been an issue, especially within some 
areas of Florida. 

In addition to its water consumption, 
the industry must store great quantities 
of water for years in "slime ponds" to 
settle out the waterborne solid wastes 
(principally colloidal clay and suspended 
phosphate particles) that remain after 
benef iciation. 8 Although the sand-sized 
particles settle relatively quickly, much 
water is entrained in the residual clay 
solids. Depending on intended postmining 
use, these wastes generally require sev- 
eral years, or even decades, to dewater 
and compact to a density that permits 
reclamation (39) . 

The slime ponds, also known as settling 
ponds, cover vast areas. Average pond 
size is 400 acres, and total pond acreage 
accounts for 65 percent of phosphate rock 
mine lands (18). In Florida, phosphate 
rock miners use more than 50,000 acres 
for settling ponds and require about 
5,000 more acres every year for addi- 
tional storage (18). In addition to the 
land impacted by settling ponds, there 
are reports that accidental spills and 
leaks pose a risk to surrounding areas. 
However, there have been no major pond 
failures in Florida since the State in- 
stituted new dam construction and inspec- 
tion regulations in 1972. 

Several million dollars worth of re- 
search has been conducted for more than 
two decades by the phosphate mining in- 
dustry, government, and academia to 
develop technology to dewater clay wastes 
more rapidly and with less environmen- 
tal impact. This research has had some 

^Approximately 500 to 1,000 gallons of 
water is entrained by each ton of col- 
loidal clay. Over 40 million tons of 
this material is generated each year at 
Florida mines alone (18). 



success. If the present level of re- 
search continues, it is likely that solu- 
tions to dewatering problems at specific 
sites will be achieved (39). 

Final Preparation 

Ore leaving the beneficiation plants 
usually is agglomerated, calcined, (high- 
temperature treatment) or ground before 
shipping and further processing. The 
particular preparation step undertaken 
depends on the organic content of the ore 
and the ultimate product for which it is 
destined. Since Florida rock is rela- 
tively free of organics, it is treated by 
simply heating to about 250° F to drive 
off free water. However, phosphate rock 
mined from other reserves in the Na- 
tion (principally in the West) contain 
hydrocarbons and must be heated to 
1,400°-1,600° F. If not removed, the 
carbon causes foaming when the ore is 
chemically treated to make phosphoric 
acid, the starting material for phos- 
phate fertilizer. During agglomeration, 
the ore is heated to 2,200°-2,600° F. 
This process not only drives off water, 
carbon dioxide, and organic matter, 
but also fuses the ore into larger 
fractions suitable for feed to the 
electric arc furnace used in the manu- 
facture of elemental phosphorus. Only 
the Tennessee ore and some Western ores 
are agglomerated. 

PERTINENT ISSUES 

This section describes the public 
issues that have evolved from the inter- 
action of environmental quality concerns 
and the apparent environmental effects of 
phosphate rock mining. These issues have 
led to the regulatory controls detailed 
in the following chapter. 

Land Disturbance 



In some regions, large areas of land 
in the United States have been dis- 
turbed by the mining operations just 



described. 9 Piles of overburden, open 
ditches, sand tailings, settling ponds, 
and excavations are among the features of 
phosphate rock mining which can mark a 
landscape. In addition to this esthetic 
impact, mining can disturb flora and 
fauna habitat and disrupt natural drain- 
age systems. The extent and persistance 
of such effects were identified as sig- 
nificant environmental problems in a 
working paper on U.S. surface mining by 
the National Academy of Sciences (1). 

Although reclamation is now required in 
all phosphate producing States, the im- 
pact of phosphate rock mining on the 
landscape has created considerable public 
opposition to the industry, particularly 
where mines are near scenic and recre- 
ation areas or in more populous regions. 
Planning for new phosphate rock mines is 
vigorously contested when it is perceived 
that the proposed mining could impact on 
primitive scenic and wildlife areas with 
a delicate ecological balance, i.e., 
the so-called wetlands in Florida. (See 
page 23.) 

Water Contamination 

Properly designed, constructed, and 
maintained settling ponds will protect 
the public from surface water and ground 
water pollution. Nevertheless, the 
alleged water contamination risk posed by 
these settling areas has been a recurrent 
environmental issue in Florida for sev- 
eral years. As noted earlier, no major 
spills or leaks have occurred since the 
State introduced new dam construction and 
maintenance regulations in 1972. In 

^ver 290,000 acres of land (more than 
75 percent in Florida) have been affected 
by domestic phosphate rock mining. This 
area accounts for about 5 percent of all 
lands disturbed by surface mining in the 
United States (_12) . Nevertheless, all 
surface mining has disturbed less than 
1 percent of total U.S. territory ( 13) . 



1979, however, a working paper for a 
National Academy of Sciences report des- 
ignated sedimentation, seepage, and dis- 
charge from waste ponds as "potential 
environmental impacts" (1). Subse- 
quently, the Bureau of Mines identified 
the management and storage of wastes in 
settling ponds as the most significant 
issue facing the Florida phosphate rock, 
industry (39). 

Water Consumption 

As described earlier, phosphate rock 
mining and benef iciation consume large 
volumes of water. Sizable water consump- 
tion per se typically is not an environ- 
mental protection problem. In North Car- 
olina and central Florida, however, water 
consumption by phosphate rock mines has 
been an environmental issue as a result 
of reports that mining in these regions 
could deplete aquifers and thereby induce 
saltwater intrusions in the wells of some 
coastal areas (18, 37). 

Air Pollution 

Until recently, air quality issues in 
the phosphate fertilizer industry focused 
on the processing plants downstream from 
mining and ore benef iciation operations. 
In 1979, however, the Environmental Pro- 
tection Agency (EPA) proposed Federal air 
quality standards for certain facilities 
at phosphate rock mines. The industry 
questioned the value of such controls on 
mining, which was already subject to 
air pollution regulations issued by 
phosphate-producing States (53) . Never- 
theless, the EPA promulgated Federal air 
quality standards for certain phosphate 
rock mine operations in April 1982. 
These standards and the State regulations 
are discussed more fully in the next 
chapter. 

Radiation 

Phosphate rock typically contains small 
amounts of uranium and its decay prod- 
ucts. Most of this low-level radioactive 



material leaves the mine site within the 
phosphate product, but some residues re- 
main behind in the overburden spoils and 
in the clay wastes. Thus, people are 
wary of using land reclaimed after phos- 
phate rock mining because they perceive a 
potential health hazard ( 18 ) . Although 
the health effects of low-level radiation 
in the reclaimed lands have received con- 
siderable study, most investigators agree 
that more testing is necessary before any 
risk posed by the radiation cafi be prop- 
erly assessed. Certain '' construction 
practices can minimize the risk. Never- 
theless, a moratorium on home construc- 
tion in some reclaimed areas of cen- 
tral Florida has been imposed by local 
government at the recommendation of the 
EPA (J^). 

Reclamation 

Proper mine reclamation practices can 
mitigate many of the environmental prob- 
lems that drive the preceding issues. 
For example, effective reclamation can 
eliminate the adverse esthetic impacts of 
mining and can reduce exposure to low- 
level radiation on derelict mine lands. 
To date, the industry has reclaimed ap- 
proximately 25 percent of all lands in 
the United States disturbed by phosphate 
rock mining (13). The reclaimed lands 
have served a wide variety of purposes, 
including agriculture, residential and 
commercial development, recreation, and 
wildlife refuges. New phosphate mining 
is not permitted by Federal or State 
authorities without an approved, bonded 
(prepaid) reclamation plan. 

The effectiveness of reclamation has 
been a key issue regarding the more con- 
troversial impacts of phosphate rock min- 
ing. Proposals for mining Florida's wet- 
lands (page 23) and other environmentally 
sensitive lands have been opposed with 
claims that the original condition of 
these areas could never be reestablished. 
The feasibility of reclaiming the wetland 
areas, which are rich in phosphate, has 
been debated for more than a decade. 



10 



CHAPTER 2. — ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS 



The following survey examines the scope 
and enforcement of Federal, State, and 
local environmental protection controls 
applicable to phosphate rock mining. The 
controls primarily consist of laws and 
regulations that set water quality stan- 
dards, limit airborne emissions, and pre- 
scribe mine reclamation practices. Other 
controls restrict access to mineral 
deposits and require environmental impact 
assessments of proposed mining. Addi- 
tional regulations, which may be issued 
in the near future, also are covered by 
this chapter. Specific costs of the con- 
trols discussed here are identified in 
the next chapter. 

The Federal and State regulations cited 
below are closely related. Federal air 
quality regulations are issued by the EPA 
but are administered by many of the 
States as part of State Implementation 
Plans (SIPS) mandated under the Air Pol- 
lution Control Act and its amendments 
("Clean Air Act"). Both the EPA and the 
States enforce water quality standards 
through the National Pollution Discharge 
Elimination System (NPDES) established 
under the Federal Water Pollution Control 
Act, as amended ("Clean Water Act"). The 
Federal controls are issued as minimum 
standards, which can be raised by the 
States. Florida, North Carolina, Idaho, 
and Tennessee are used to illustrate 
State regulations. 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS 

Federal 



The process of providing an EIS is 
often long, costly, and complicated due 
to several court decisions and strict 
procedural provisions under NEPA (24). 
If an EIS indicates that a proposed ac- 
tion will have an adverse impact, the 
action can be revised, but a new EIS may 
be required. This procedure can take 
several years. 

EIS's have been prepared by the EPA, 
the U.S. Department of the Interior, and 
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for sev- 
eral proposed phosphate rock mine proj- 
ects throughout the United States (e.g. , 
California, Florida, Idaho, and North 
Carolina). These EIS's were prerequi- 
sites for Federal decisions regarding 
mineral leasing, mining on Federal lands, 
and issuance of water pollution con- 
trol permits. The EIS's were required 
under NEPA guidelines and/or provisions 
of the Federal Water Pollution Control 
Act. 

State 



In addition to NEPA, many States have 
laws that require State or local agencies 
to file reports that evaluate the envi- 
ronmental impact of their proposed ac- 
tions that may significantly affect the 
environment (24). Some States can forego 
this requirement if a Federal impact 
statement is prepared (24). However, the 
environmental assessment process clearly 
is more costly and complicated if both 
State and Federal evaluations are 
required. 



The National Environmental Policy Act 
of 1969 (NEPA) requires all Federal Agen- 
cies to prepare assessments of their pro- 
posed actions that would affect the qual- 
ity of the human environment. These 
assessments, known as Environmental Im- 
pact Statements (EIS), must detail the 
environmental impact of the proposed 
action, indicate adverse environmental 
effects, identify alternatives, and indi- 
cate any resources that would be fore- 
gone. The EIS must also consider the 
relationship between short-term uses and 
long-term productivity. 



Florida, the State with most phosphate 
rock production, requires a Development 
of Regional Impact (DRI) report on all 
proposed mining projects that will exceed 
100 acres or consume more than 3,000,000 
gallons of water per day (10). The DRI 
program, administered by the Department 
of Veteran and Community Affairs under 
the Florida Environmental Land and Water 
Management Act of 1972, calls for a broad 
spectrum of information that details the 
proposed mining project and its effect on 
the environment and on the economy of 
impacted counties. The mine developer 



11 



must prepare the DRI report and submit 
it to the Regional Planning Coun- 
cils involved for a public hearing and 
ruling. 

AIR QUALITY STANDARDS 

Federal 

Federal air quality controls that can 
apply to phosphate rock, mining are issued 
by the EPA under the Clean Air Act for 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards 
(NAAQS) , Prevention of Significant Dete- 
rioration (PSD), "nonattainment" require- 
ments, and New Source Performance Stan- 
dards (NSPS). Mines operating since 1970 
can be required to satisfy NAAQS by the 
application of continuous emission reduc- 
tion technology (18) . PSD regulations 
require that calculations for air quality 
include fugitive dust from surface mining 
operations (18) . In regions that are 
below minimum air quality standards 
("nonattainment areas"), special permits 
and the "lowest achievable emission rate" 
are stipulated for new and modified 
emission sources, including mines. State 
agencies administer all of these Federal 
controls as minimum standards after their 
regulatory implementation plans are ap- 
proved by the EPA. 

Air pollution regulations specifically 
for phosphate rock mining recently have 
been promulgated (40 CFR 60) by the EPA 
under NSPS provisions of the Clean Air 
Act, These regulations, issued in April 
1982, set air emission standards for cer- 
tain ore benef iciation and drying facil- 
ities such as crushing, screening, and 
grinding plants (39) . The standards 
implement section 307 (b) (1) of the 
Clean Air Act and apply to mine facil- 
ities constructed, modified, or recon- 
structed after September 29, 1979, and 
which have production rates greater than 
4 short tons (2,000 pounds) per hour. 
Both atmospheric opacity and particulate 
emissions are controlled by the stan- 
dards. Fugitive dust and other airborne 
particulates arising from stripping 
and excavation operations are exempt. 
The specific emission limits are as 
follows (49): 



Standards will limit emissions of 
particulate matter to 0.03 kilogram 
per ton of rock feed from phosphate 
rock dryers, 0.120 kilogram per ton 
from phosphate rock calciners pro- 
cessing unbenef iciated rock or blends 
of beneficiated and unbenef iciated 
rock, 0.055 kilogram per ton from 
phosphate rock grinders. Opacity 
levels from grinders and ground rock 
storage and handling systems are lim- 
ited to zero percent. Opacity levels 
from dryers and calciners are limited 
to no more than 10 percent. 

State 



Several States with phosphate rock min- 
ing have imposed air quality standards 
that are more stringent than the Federal 
controls. A sample of key State regula- 
tions is presented below. 

Florida . — Applicable regulations in 
the State are extensive and detailed. 
These controls, in effect since 1975, 
cover operations not regulated by 
Federal NSPS and include the follow- 
ing specifications: 

• The maximum permissible emis- 
sions from calcining or other 
thermal phosphate rock processing 
operations and auxiliary equip- 
ment except phosphate rock drying 
and def luorinating is 0.05 pound 
of fluoride per short ton of 
phosphorus pentoxide (P20g) feed. 

• The maximum permissible emis- 
sions from defluorinating phos- 
phate rock by thermal processing 
and auxiliary equipment is 0.37 
pound of fluoride per short ton 
of P2O5 feed. 

• Regulations affecting fugitive 
particulates require the use of 
reasonable precautions that pre- 
vent emissions. 

• Operations must be curtailed or 
postponed when the State declares 
than an air pollution emergency 
exists. 



12 



North Carolina. — Key air quality 
controls stipulate that — 

• All mines must register with 
the State. 

• Emissions from existing fa- 
cilities may not exceed 40 per- 
cent opacity for more than 5 min- 
utes per hour or more than 20 
minutes per day. 

• Emissions from new facili- 
ties may not exceed 20 per- 
cent opacity under the same 
time constraints for existing 
facilities. 

• Mining facilities must cease 
operations when an air pollution 
emergency is declared by the 
State. 

Idah o. — Relevant air quality stan- 
dards apply to industry in general. 
Visible emission standards apply to 
both existing and new sources. 
Existing sources may not exceed 40 
percent opacity for more than 3 min- 
utes per hour. Regulations base 
standards for particulate emissions 
on process weight rate. 

Tennessee . — Air quality regulations 
applicable to phosphate rock mining 
include the following: 

• Fugitive dust standards apply 
to materials handling, trans- 
portation, and storage, and re- 
quire reasonable precautions to 
prevent particulate matter from 
becoming airborne. Among these 
precautions are use of water or 
chemicals to control dust from 
land cleaning or material stock- 
piles, and installation and use 
of hoods, fans, and fabric 
filters to enclose and vent the 
areas where dusty materials are 
handled. 

• Visible emissions from any 
air contamination source cannot 
exceed 20 percent opacity for 
more than 5 minutes in any 



1 hour or more than 20 minutes in 
any 24-hour period. 

• Particulate emission standards 
for process emission sources con- 
structed before August 9, 1969, 
may be determined by diffusion 
equations or process weight 
rates. The allowable emissions 
levels or particulate matter for 
new process emission sources is 
based on a table of process 
weight rates. 

• New or modified plants building 
in a nonattainment area may be 
required to apply the best avail- 
able particulate emission control 
technology. 

WATER QUALITY STANDARDS 

Federal 

The EPA has promulgated water quality 
control regulations specifically for 
phosphate rock mining (40 CFR 436) . 
These regulations, authorized under the 
Clean Water Act, were issued for existing 
phosphate rock mines in July 1977, and 
for new phosphate rock mines in March 
1978 (43-44) . The term "new mine" was 
defined by the EPA to mean any mining 
facility for which construction began 
after the regulations were publicly pro- 
posed (June 10, 1976). 

The EPA regulations place effluent lim- 
itations on total suspended solids (TSS) 
and on pH levels. These limitations, 
which are the same for both existing and 
new mines, are shown below. 



Effluent 
characteristic 



Total suspended 
solids (mg/1). 



Average of dail y 
Maximum values for 30 
for any consecutiv e days 
1 day shall no t 
exceed — 



60 



pH 6.0-9.0 



30 
9.0 



The limitations required the application 
of best practical technology (BPT) rather 
than best available techology (BAT) for 
compliance. 



13 



In addition to the effluent standards 
described, the Clean Water Act also au- 
thorizes Federal control over the dis- 
charge of dredge and fill material into 
"navigable waters" of the United States. 
Under Section 404 of the act, the Corps 
of Engineers has the authority to issue 
or to withhold permits for such dis- 
charges, including those from phosphate 
rock mining. The jurisdiction of the 
Corps for this permitting was consider- 
ably expanded in 1975 when the District 
Court of the District of Columbia inter- 
preted navigable waters to mean all 
waters, including wetlands such as swamp 
and marsh ( 10 ) . 

Final regulations for the Corps Section 
404 program were published in the Federal 
Register in July 1977. As detailed in 
the next chapter, mine permitting under 
these regulations can be lengthy and 
complicated. 



milligrams per liter. The limi- 
tations will lie within the range 
of 0.1 to 5.0 milligrams per 
liter. 

• Permits must be obtained for 
the excavation of more than 100 
cubic yards of materials when 
such material is excavated adja- 
cent to or discharged into most 
water areas. 

Idaho . — Standards for water pollu- 
tion include the following: 

• No discharges may increase the 
turbidity of receiving waters be- 
yond specified limits. 

• Wastewaters discharged to lakes 
or impoundments must not exceed 
the properties permitted for the 
receiving water. 



State (^8 ) 

While most States merely incorporate 
Federal guidelines and standards, several 
States have issued additional water qual- 
ity standards that directly affect phos- 
phate rock mining facilities. Some of 
these extra standards are listed below. 



Florida . — Water standards include 
following provisions: 



the 



• Pollutants from subsurface 
waste disposal facilities must 
not enter adjacent waters. 

• Wastes must be stored so as to 
prevent the material from being 
carried into adjacent waters. 



Tennessee . — Regulations 
water quality standards 
limitation standards. 



include both 
and effluent 



• Discharges are prohibited from 
from altering the pH of receiving 
water by more than 1.0 pH unit. 

• Permits are required for drain- 
ing wells. 

• Secondary treatment or equal- 
ly effective treatment and con- 
trol is the minimum acceptable 
abatement action for all sig- 
nificant sources of water 
pollution. 

• Effluent limits may be estab- 
lished for settleable solids in 
addition to Federal guidelines 
when the projected average sol- 
ids concentration exceeds 5.0 



• Water quality standards include 
the following: 

No substances may be added that 
will increase the hardness or 
mineral content of receiving 
waters to such an extent as to 
appreciably impair the usefulness 
of the receiving waters. 

Total dissolved solids may never 
exceed 500 milligrams per liter. 

No turbidity or color can be 
added in amounts that cannot be 
reduced to acceptable concen- 
trations by conventional water 
treatment processes. 



14 



• Effluent limitation require- 
ments include the following: 

Where practical and economically 
feasible, a "closed cycle" water 
reuse system with no discharge 
will be incorporated into the 
permit. 

Wastewater discharges to a water 
course that has no flow for sig- 
nificant periods at the point of 
discharge are discouraged. 

Instantaneous maximum concentra- 
tion may be imposed when toxic or 
harmful parameters are present in 
such significant amounts as to 
represent a threat to the receiv- 
ing waters or when the discharge 
is irregular. 

Permits may prohibit the dis- 
charge of unusually high concen- 
trations of contaminants during 
short periods of time. 

LAND USE AND LAND MANAGEMENT LAWS 

Federal 

Concerns about environmental quality in 
recent years have led to an increase in 
Federal laws and policies that prohibit 
mining on much of the public domain. 
Studies by both the Department of the 
Interior and the Office of Technology 
Assessment agree that mining already has 
been prohibited or severely restricted 
on at least 40 to 50 percent of Federal 
lands (21). Such prohibitions can place 
significant restraints on the development 
of new phosphate resources (50). 

More than 20 Federal agencies in a 
dozen departments control nearly 800 mil- 
lion acres of land (one-third of the 
country) , including extensive areas known 
to be highly mineralized (23). Many of 
these areas (particularly in several 
Western States, Alaska, and the Osceola 
National Forest of Florida) contain rich 
deposits of phosphate rock. As deposits 



are depleted on private lands in the 
Eastern States, future domestic phosphate 
production may depend on the development 
of such public land resources (50). 

Most of the authority to control public 
land mining resides in the U.S. Forest 
Service and in certain Department of the 
Interior agencies, particularly the Bu- 
reau of Land Management (BLM) . Forest 
Service and BLM controls are authorized 
primarily by the Forest and Rangeland 
Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 
and the Federal Land Policy and Manage- 
ment Act of 1976, which are described 
below. These laws have given both agen- 
cies considerable discretionary authority 
to permit or forbid mining on the public 
domain ( 24 ) . 

Prohibitions against mining on Federal 
lands for purposes of environmental pro- 
tection are based principally on three 
types of authority legislated by Congress 
in the past two decades: (1) The author- 
ity to withdraw an area from the purview 
of other Federal land use laws in order 
to preserve its environmental character, 
(2) the authority to manage the public 
domain and determine the best use for 
every part of it, and (3) the' authority 
to reserve selected areas for certain 
uses such as national parks and wildlife 
refuges. One or more of these author- 
ities are contained in each of the fol- 
lowing pertinent Federal land laws en- 
acted since 1964 ( 23 , 42). 

Classification and Multiple Use Act 
of 1964 (43 U.S.C. 1411-1418) 

Description: Authorizes the Secre- 
tary of the Interior to classify 
lands under exclusive management of 
the Bureau of Land Management, and to 
specify dominant uses and preclude 
others as inconsistent. Authorizes 
but does not require classifica- 
tion or proposed classification to 
segregate land from mining locations 
and mineral leasing. This Act ex- 
pired in 1971. 



15 



Wilderness Act (1964) 
(16 U.S.C. 1131-1136) 

Description: Provides for Federally 
owned "wilderness areas" to be desig- 
nated by Acts of Congress. Wilder- 
ness areas remain open under the min- 
ing and mineral leasing laws until 
the end of 1983 but will be closed 
(to new entries, permits, and leases) 
thereafter. In addition to areas 
proposed by the Congress, the Secre- 
tary of the Interior is instructed to 
examine every roadless area in na- 
tional park and national wildlife 
refuge systems (not Bureau of Land 
Management lands) consisting of more 
than 5,000 contiguous acres for pos- 
sible inclusion; the Secretary of 
Agriculture is to likewise examine 
the so-called "primitive areas". 

Forest and Rang eland Renewable 
Resources Planni-ng Act of 1974 
(16 U.S.C. 1600-1614, as amended) 

De scription ; Directs the Secretary 
of Agriculture to recommend a renew- 
able resource program including land 
and resource management plans for the 
National Forest system, and to imple- 
ment the plans. Under this Act the 
Forest Service can reject exploration 
and mining permits if the agency 
believes that these activities con- 
flict with other land uses, including 
natural resource preservation for 
recreation, scenic areas, etc. 

Federal Land Poliey Management Aat 
of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701-1782) 

Description: Provides a basic char- 
ter for the Bureau of Land Manage- 
ment; declares national policy for 
land-use planning, use, and disposal 
("national interest," multiple use, 
fair market value) , including land 
withdrawals, which are defined as: 

. . .withholding an area of Federal 
land from settlement, sale, location, 
or entry, under some or all of the 
general land laws, for the purpose of 
limiting activities under those laws 



in order to maintain other public 
values in the area or reserving the 
area for a particular public purpose 
or program. . ." 

Through the act, Congress reserved for 
itself the authority to create, modify 
and terminate withdrawals or reservations 
for national parks, national forests, the 
Wilderness system, certain defense with- 
drawals, Wild and Scenic Rivers, National 
Trails, National Recreation Areas, and 
National Seashores. It also reserved the 
authority to modify and revoke withdraw- 
als from National Monuments and the 
National Wildlife Refuge System. The Act 
also grants the Secretary of the Interior 
broad withdrawal authority including ex- 
plicit authorization to withdraw land 
from operation of the 1972 Mining law. 

The Act mandates tha BLM lands must be 
managed in a manner which protects the 
environment. Moreover, if an area is 
of "critical environmental concern" its 
environmental value must be protected. 

Mining Activity Within National 
Park System Areas (1976) 
(16 U.S.C. 1901-1912) 

Description: Makes mining activities 
in national parks subject to such 
regulations as the Secretary of the 
Interior finds necessary or desirable 
for the preservation and management 
of those areas. Withdraws all park 
system units then open from further 
operation of the mining laws. 

In addition to these laws. Executive 
Order No. 10355 (17 FR 4831; May 26, 
1952) delegates to the Secretary of the 
Interior the authority to withdraw land, 
whether implied or specifically author- 
ized by statute (42) . 

State and Local Government 



Many State agencies and local Govern- 
ment entities, principally counties and 
municipalities, enforce land use controls 
that can restrict mining activities. 
These controls often serve a variety 
of purposes (zoning, noise abatement. 



16 



planning, etc.) that include environmen- 
tal protection objectives. Florida, the 
major phosphate producing State, provides 
an excellent example of the types of land 
use controls a mine operator can encoun- 
ter below the Federal level. In fact, 
this State probably has the widest spec- 
trxim of land-use planning controls in the 
country (12). Nevertheless, land use 
regulations analogous to some of these 
controls can be found in other phosphate 
rock, producing States, albeit restric- 
tions appear to be minimal at the county 
and local levels in most Western mining 
regions. 

In Florida, counties and municipalities 
issue most land use plans and regula- 
tions, although the State retains a few 
controls. The Florida State Comprehen- 
sive Planning Act of 1972 established a 
State comprehensive planning process. 
Under the act, mining plans and opera- 
tions must be coordinated with land plan- 
ning at all levels of government (18). 
The Florida Environmental Land and Water 
Management Act of 1972 also established a 
State program to protect environmental, 
historical, and natural areas of regional 
or statewide significance. In addition, 
it established the DRI program discussed 
previously (18). 

In several Florida counties, zoning 
ordinances and land development guide- 
lines balance mining with other land 
uses, including parks, wildlife refuges, 
etc. According to a Polk County zoning 
ordinance, phosphate rock mining is clas- 
sified as "a special planned unit devel- 
opment" permitted only if a mine plan is 
submitted directly to the County Board of 
Commissioners (18). The county also 
requires an impact assessment as a pre- 
requisite for any land use ruling on pro- 
posed mine development or for a zoning 
variance regarding mine activities that 
would disturb more than 50 acres of land, 
the rezoning process places most of the 
responsibility for data generation on the 
mine developer. 



MINE RECLAMATION REGULATIONS 

Fed eral 

The only Federal environmental law 
enacted to regulate mine reclamation (the 
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation 
Act of 1977) is limited to coal mining 
operations. On Federal land, however, 
reclamation is required after mining any 
mineral, including phosphate rock. This 
reclamation is controlled to some degree 
by the BLM through its mineral leasing 
authority. Before granting a mineral 
lease, the BLM must approve the proposed 
mining plan, including intended reclama- 
tion practices (18). The Bureau can 
stipulate what reclamation procedures 
will be followed to minimize environmen- 
tal damage. 

New Federal controls for non-coal mine 
reclamation have been considered in re- 
cent years. The EPA proposed in 1978 
that certain portions of the act be 
applied to phosphate rock mine reclama- 
tion (36) . Subsequently, a study re- 
quired by the Surface Mining Control and 
Reclamation Act reported that sections of 
the act were suitable for regulating most 
phosphate rock mining (7). Thus far, 
however, no additional reclamation laws 
have been enacted by Congress. 

State 



State and local laws account for vir- 
tually all of the environmental regu- 
lations governing reclamation practices 
in phosphate rock mining. These laws 
have similar reclamation objectives, but, 
as seen below, the States differ in 
the scope and specificity of their reg- 
ulations. Florida alone has a radiation 
control standard. Other differences 
between the States include different 
time periods allowed for reclamation and 
minor variations due to topographic 
diversity. 



17 



Florid a O, _5i) • — ^^ the largest 
U.S. producer of phosphate rock, 
Florida has the most imposing and 
specific reclamation laws in the 
country. Chapter 16c-16 of the Flor- 
ida Administrative Code and Chapters 
211, Florida Statutes, constitute the 
State's mine reclamation law. Under 
Florida law, all phosphate rock mines 
active after July 1, 1975, must be 
reclaimed soon after operations 
cease. Reclamation of mines closed 
prior to that date is supported in 
part by a State severence tax on 
phosphate rock. Also, an ad valorem 
tax credit is given to firms that 
reclaim any phosphate rock mine. 



• Revegetation of reclaimed 
area. — Eighty percent of re- 
claimed area must be revegetated 
except for permanent roads; bare 
areas no greater than 1/4 acre 
should use indigenous species. 

• Site cleanup. — All visible de- 
bris, litter, junk, worn-out or 
unusable equipment, footings, 
poles, piling, and cables should 
be removed; rocks or boulders 
must be distinctly visible or 
buried at least 4 feet deep. 

• Structures. — All temporary min- 
ing sheds shall be removed. 



Florida law mandates a specific 
reclamation schedule. Reclamation 
under an approved program must begin 
within 18 months after mining ends; 
for settling ponds, the waiting 
period cannot exceed 10 years. All 
reclamation programs must be com- 
pleted within 4 years of their ini- 
tiation. A progress report must be 
submitted each year for every recla- 
mation program that is underway. 

A mine reclamation plan must be 
submitted to the Florida Department 
of Natural Resources for approval at 
least 6 months prior to the date 
that restoration is scheduled to be- 
gin. The reclamation program must 
meet certain minimum Federal and 
State standards regarding water qual- 
ity, soil stabilization, health and 
safety, and other natural resources. 
Some of the standards are as 
follows (7). 

• Grading or slopes. — Peaks, 
ridges, and hills naist be 
blended; slopes no steeper than 
four units horizontal to one unit 
vertical (4h:lv); grade to avoid 
collection of stagnant water; 
create lake bank side slopes no 
steeper than 4h:lv; subaqueous 
slopes no steeper than 4h:lv to a 
depth of 6 feet; no permanent 
water body less than 3 acres; 
lake minimum depth of 6 feet. 



• Solid waste. — Inform State of 
quality, source, and future 
disposition. 

• Flooding. — Endeavor to elimi- 
nate floods caused by "silting or 
damming of stream channels, 
slumping or debris slides, uncon- 
trolled erosion, or intentional 
spoiling or diking. " 

• Chemical ponds. — Water dis- 
charged must meet effluent 
standards. 

• Lakes. — Lakes must not contrib- 
ute to soil erosion, stream 
pollution or jeopardize health, 
safety, or property; must be able 
to support fish and other wild- 
life and allow recreation; must 
be free of toxic or harmful sub- 
stances or those that create a 
nuisance from color, odor, or 
other conditions. 

In addition to State law, five cen- 
tral Florida counties with phosphate 
rock mining (De Soto, Hardee, Hills- 
borough, Manatee, and Polk) issue and 
enforce their own reclamation ordi- 
nances. Many of these county laws 
predate State reclamation standards 
and some are more stringent. For ex- 
ample, bonding to guarantee reclama- 
tion is required by each of the coun- 
ties, but not by the State. 



18 



North Carolina (7^, 21, 20^). — The 
North Carolina Mining Act of 1971, as 
amended, requires that a State mining 
permit include an approved recla- 
mation plan that addresses the 
following: 

• Proposed action to protect ad- 
jacent surface resources. 

• Specifications for surface gra- 
dient restoration suitable for 
future proposed use and method of 
implementation. 

• Manner and type of revegetation. 

• "The type of vegetative cover 
and method of its establish- 
ment shall be specified, and in 
every case shall conform to ac- 
cepted and recommended agronomic 
and reforestation restoration 
practices. " 

All mined land must be reclaimed 
with 2 years after completion or ter- 
mination of mining in any given seg- 
ment of the permitted area. A report 
is due within 30 days of mine clo- 
sure, or within 30 days of the per- 
mit's anniversary. Reclamation bonds 
must be posted by the mining company 
with the State's Department of Natu- 
ral and Economic Resources. 

Tennessee (7, 18, 34). — The Tennessee 
Surface Mining Law, implemented by 
the Department of Conservation, 
governs reclamation in the State. 
The law requires that a reclamation 
plan accompany mine permit applica- 
tions. This plan must include a 
description of postmining land use 
and a guarantee to perform the 
following: 

• Regrade to approximately origi- 
nal contours. 

• Eliminate all highwalls , spoil 
piles, and water-collecting de- 
pressions using only stockpiled 
overburden. 



• Control water drainage and silt 
control and soil erosion pol- 
lution of streams and other 
waters. 

• Revegetate with appropriate 
grasses and/or trees. 

All reclamation for each acre must 
be completed within 1 year after min- 
ing ends on that acre. Additionally, 
to assure reclamation, a bond or cash 
deposit of at least $600 per acre 
must be given to the State before 
mining begins. The State holds this 
amount until vegetation has been suc- 
cessfully reestablished. 

Idaho ( 11 , 18).— The Idaho Surface 
Mining Act regulates mine reclamation 
activities in the State. The law re- 
quires reclamation when exploration 
or surface mining disturb 2 or more 
acres of land. Under the law, mine 
operators must fill a reclamation 
plan prior to mining in order to 
specify what will be done to comply 
with State requirements. The Depart- 
ment of Land is the State reclamation 
enforcement agency. 

The State requires that the following 
reclamation actions be performed: 

• Level ridges and overburden 
piles. 

• Control erosion of overburden 
piles. 

• Control water runoff that result 
in stream or lake siltation. 

• Prevent erosion in abandoned 
roads. 

• Plug exploration holes. 

• Revegetate mine areas, overbur- 
den piles, and abandoned roads. 

• Control tailings ponds. 



19 



POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS 

In addition to the regulations de- 
scribed, the phosphate rock mining indus- 
try faces the possibility of significant 
new environmental protection controls in 
the near future. In particular. Federal 
environmental standards for solid wastes 
and radiation emissions could be applied 
to the industry. These standards, along 
with some analogous State controls, are 
discussed below. 

Solid Waste Regulations 



The Resource Conservation and Recovery 
Act of 1976 (RCRA) could become one of 
the most complex and far-reaching regula- 
tory controls on surface mining, and has 
serious implications for the phosphate 
rock industry (18). When RCEIA was en- 
acted, mine wastes were included (Section 
1004) among the harmful industrial solid 
waste materials that the law was intended 
to regulate. Consequently, in May 1980, 
the EPA proposed RCRA regulations (40 CFR 
260) governing the handling and disposal 
of certain mining wastes, including those 
generated at phosphate rock mines. Soon 
afterward, however. Congress passed the 
Solid Waste Disposal Act Amendments of 
1980, which temporarily prohibited EPA 
from regulating "solid waste for the 
extraction, benef iciation, and processing 
of ores and minerals, including phosphate 
rock..." The amendments specify that 
this exemption from RCRA is to remain in 
effect until 6 months after an environ- 
mental impact study of mining wastes is 
completed in October 1983. As required 
by the amendments, phosphate rock is one 
of the minerals on which the study will 
focus its attention. Thus, the study is 
likely to influence what solid waste reg- 
ulations, if any, will be applied to 
phosphate rock mining. 

The States can develop and enforce the 
waste management programs authorized by 
RCRA if the programs are approved by the 
EPA. At present, most States generally 
exclude mining from solid waste regula- 
tion laws (18). However, fugitive emis- 
sions and effluents from mining wastes 



are subject to States air and water pol- 
lution controls. 

Radiation Standards 



In addition to existing radiation lim- 
its, 10 there is a distinct possibility 
that the Federal government may promul- 
gate new radiation regulations intended 
to control exposure to the radioactive 
materials generally found in phosphate 
rock ores. It is conceivable that such 
regulations would be issued under the 
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 
cited above. Under Section 3001 of the 
act, the EPA classified phosphate rock 
mine wastes as hazardous due to radio- 
active content in 1978. 

During the 1970' s, following the iden- 
tification of potential health problems 
associated with home construction on 
uranium mill tailings in Colorado, the 
EPA began investigating the effects of 
uranium known to be present in the waste 
products of phosphate rock mines (9). 
The Agency initiated several studies to 
quantify the magnitude of radiation in 
reclaimed mine areas in Florida. Interim 
reports concluded that under worst case 
conditions there was a calculated health 
risk associated with home construction in 
these areas (9). However, this conclu- 
sion was based on extrapolation of health 
effects recorded at higher exposure lev- 
els and assumed that only zero risk was 
acceptable (9). Most investigators agree 
that additional study is needed before 
firm conclusions can be drawn regarding 
the potential hazard posed by radioactive 
emissions in phosphate mine wastes. Nev- 
ertheless, some EPA studies have recom- 
mended that regulatory controls (re- 
stricted access, and specific reclamation 
practices) be placed on certain mined 
areas to reduce exposure of the general 

1 ^Worker Health and Safety standards 
enforced by the Mining Safety and Health 
Administration and the Occupational 
Safety and Health Administration (U.S. 
Department of Labor) already limit em- 
ployee exposure to radiation at phosphate 
rock mines . 



20 



public to radioactive emissions (48) . As 
a result of EPA findings, Hillsborough 
County in Florida has imposed a morator- 
ium on building in reclaimed phosphate 
rock, mine lands (18). In other States, 
such as North Carolina, broad radiation 
emission control laws conceivably could 
be applied to phosphate rock mines, al- 
though they were not specifically enacted 
for that purpose (17). 

Future Federal regulation of radio- 
active emissions at phosphate rock mines 
may be contingent on the results of the 
environmental impact study of mining 
wastes ordered by the Solid Waste Dis- 
posal Act Amendments noted above. The 
EPA has indicated that radioactivity in 
phosphate rock mine wastes will be one 
subject of the study (15). At this 
point, however, so little is known about 
mine radiation control technology and the 
long-term effects of low-level radiation 
that it would be premature to speculate 
about what specific regulations could be 
issued. 

ADDITIONAL LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONTROLS 

Various county, regional, and municipal 
agencies enforce environmental laws and 
land use regulations that can affect 
phosphate rock mining. County and local 
governments can issue zoning and building 
codes which mine operators must satisfy. 
In addition, mining companies in some 
areas must accommodate local pollution, 
health, and drinking water ordinances 
(9). Florida has very stringent county 
and local controls on phosphate rock min- 
ing. However, such controls apparently 
are minimal or absent in many Western 
producing areas. 



County governments administer most of 
the land-use regulations on mining in 
Florida (17). Five counties in the State 
have issued excavation or earth-moving 
ordinances to control phosphate rock min- 
ing (10). These ordinances all require a 
zoning variance based on the production 
of a conceptual master plan, a permitting 
procedure that allows ongoing monitoring, 
and annual detailed plans and reviews 
of the operation. The annual reviews 
require information on mining methodol- 
ogy, reclamation progress, and compliance 
with numerous environmental considera- 
tions including the following (10) . 

• Dam construction and settling 
ponds. 

• Easements of adjacent owners. 

• Soil vibrations and noise. 

• Flood plain restrictions. 

• Monitoring requirements for wa- 
ter and air, groundwater, rain- 
fall, sewage effluent, radiation, 
etc. 

• Reclamation standards with re- 
spect to slopes, lake depths, 
time limitations, etc. 

To enforce these restrictions, several 
counties require evidence of financial 
responsibility or require bonds (up to 
$2,000 per acre) to be posed on lands to 
be mined. County officials in Florida 
also review and rule on the DRI reports 
for major mine projects, which were pre- 
viously cited (9). 



CHAPTER 3.— THE COST OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION CONTROLS 



21 



This chapter identifies the costs asso- 
ciated with each of the categories of 
regulations examined in chapter 2. These 
costs include the restraints imposed by 
regulations as well as the expenditures 
necessary to achieve compliance. (Refer 
to the preceding chapter for a descrip- 
tion of specific regulations related to 
the costs discussed below.) 

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT COSTS 

Preparation of Federal EIS's on phos- 
phate rock mining cost both time and 
money. The companies that proposed the 
mine projects covered by the EIS's cited 
in Chapter 2 had to develop much data and 
conduct many analyses, and in most cases 
were required to reimburse the Federal 
agencies involved. Two companies in 
Florida reported that the EIS's on their 
projects cost them about $2 million each 
and required at least 3 years to complete 
(27-28) « In North Carolina, another com- 
pany paid nearly $700,000 and needed 
almost 2 years to finish its EIS ( 51 , 
56) . These expenses are confirmed by 
collateral information from Federal agen- 
cies which prepared regional EIS's on the 
phosphate mining in Florida and Idaho; 
each of these two studies required $2 to 
$3 million and more than 3 years to com- 
plete (2^, 21)«^^ Although these latter 
two EIS's were funded principally by the 
responsible agencies, the companies in- 
volved had to provide analytical support 
and could not plan or schedule mine 
development with any certainty while the 
studies were underway. 

In addition to providing EIS support to 
Federal agencies, phosphate mining com- 
panies must prepare studies of their 
projects for environmental impact assess- 
ments required by State and local author- 
ities. For example, the DRI reports 
required in Florida and noted earlier can 
take several years to prepare and were 

_ — 

' 'It should be noted, however, that 
these studies examined more projects than 
are encompassed by most EIS's on phos- 
phate mining. 



estimated to cost an average of more than 
$250,000 in a 1978 study (57). Several 
phosphate mine operators claim that this 
cost now easily exceeds $1 million (10). 
As with most EIS's, the DRI costs are 
borne principally by the operator. 

AIR QUALITY CONTROLS COSTS 

Prior to the recent Federal air quality 
regulations reviewed in the preceding 
chapter, domestic phosphate rock mines 
were operating under air pollution con- 
trols either initiated by the State or 
mandated by State-implemented programs of 
the Clean Air Act. The annualized in- 
stallation and operating costs of these 
preexisting controls was calculated by 
the EPA to be about $0.35 per ton of 
phosphate rock at new Eastern U.S. mines 
and approximately $0.87 per ton at new 
Western mines (49). It is estimated that 
the additional Federal performance stan- 
dards would increase control costs by 
$0.02-$0.07 and $0.08-$0.28 at Eastern 
and Western mines, respectively (49). ''2 
EPA computations indicate that com- 
pliance with the new standards would 
increase mine production costs less than 
0.2 percent (46). 

The EPA also has stated that the cost 
of removing air pollutants under the 
Federal standards for phosphate mining is 
much less than analogous costs in other 
domestic industries (45) . In a public 
review of the standards, however, the 
phosphate industry claimed that some 
of the new regulations and implement- 
ing technology are neither feasible nor 
economic (8, 45). The industry did 
not contest the assertion that the air 
standards account for only a small 
portion of total production costs and 
are minor compared with other control 
expenditures. 

^^The greater costs for the latter 
mines reflect their smaller capacity as 
well as the higher percentage of fines 
and lower moisture in Western phosphate 
rock ores (49) . 



22 



WATER QUALITY CONTROL COSTS 

As described in chapter 2, Federal 
water quality standards were issued 
for phosphate rock mines in 1977 and 
1978. The estimated cost of meeting such 
standards when they were promulgated is 
shown in table 3. The lower costs 
shown for Western mining is attributable 
to more favorable mineral character- 
istics, process practices, and climatic 
conditions (_3). 

Some caveats apply to table 3: The 
costs shown represent the expenses of a 
hypothetical mine that had no preexisting 
effluent controls and would require BAT 
to meet the Federal standards. Most 
phosphate mines, however, already had 
installed pollution abatement controls 
and were operating under State regula- 
tions at or near compliance with the Fed- 
eral standards prior to their promulga- 
tion 0).13 Moreover, the EPA allowed 
the industry to achieve compliance by 
using BPT rather than the more costly 
BAT. 14 Thus, EPA calculations indicate 
that the cost of meeting the Federal 
standards was a fraction of the costs 

' ^h study by the National Academy of 
Sciences (_1_9) reported that the cost of 
meeting State wastewater regulations in 
Florida (for slimes and tailings dis- 
posal) totaled $0.13 and $0.14 per ton of 
product at existing and new mines, 
respectively. 

I^The Agency originally proposed BAT 
controls before the final standards 
were issued, and still retains the 
option to issue requirements for such 
controls ( 14) . 



shown in table 3, and accounted for less 
than 8 percent of total mining and bene- 
ficiation costs (_3). 

Despite the foregoing qualifications, 
table 3 is useful because it provides 
some basis for estimating the cost of 
complying with water quality regulations 
that meet existing Federal standards. 
These costs may be conservative for most 
phosphate mines in view of the more 



strict State 
chapter 2. 



regulations cited in 



The section 404 dredge and fill permit 
described in chapter 2 has been a pre- 
requisite for phosphate mine projects in 
at least two States (Florida and North 
Carolina). The permitting process in 
each State took more than 3 years to com- 
plete; moreover, one of the section 404 
permits required an EIS that cost a phos- 
phate mining company more than $600,000 
to prepare (56). The impact of section 
404 permitting on industrial activities, 
including mining, currently is being 
evaluated by the Office of Technology 
Assessment for Congressional review of 
the Clean Water Act in 1983 (41). Mine 
permitting costs under section 404 of the 
act and other environmental laws ~ is dis- 
cussed in more detail in the last section 
of this chapter. 

In Florida, a State program that paral- 
lels the section 404 permitting procedure 
requires two additional dredge and fill 
permits in order to mine "wetland" areas 
(9). It has been estimated that strict 
enforcement of the water pollution regu- 
lations regarding these permits would 



TABLE 3. - Cost of complying with water quality standards for domestic 
phosphate rock mines in 1977 (18) 



Mine location 


Investment 


Annual 


Per ton of 
product 


Total industry 
cost 


Eastern States , 

Western States 


$17,213,500 
2,487,500 


$3,182,000 
541,300 


$1.59 
1.07 


$67,322,000 
5,529,000 



Notes: Typical mine capacity used in estimating cost was 2 million tons 
per year for Eastern mines and 500,000 tons per year for Western 
mines. 

Cost estimates assume an annual recovery of capital at 10 percent 
interest and depreciation of pond construction cost over 20 years, 
process equipment over 10 years, and handling equipment over 
5 years. 



23 



prevent the mining of up to 40 percent of 
phosphate resources in central Florida 
(10). A further discussion of the costs 
involved in the regulation of these 
wetland resources begins in the next 
section. 

COST OF LAND-USE RESTRICTIONS 

As described earlier, a combination of 
environmental protection policies and 
land-use laws, particularly at the Fed- 
eral level, can significantly reduce the 
amount of land where mining is per- 
missible. The costs imparted by such 
restrictions can have the following re- 
sults: First, the restrictions decrease 
the amount of mineral resources available 
for development; second, delays and 
uncertainties regarding the application 
of restrictions can deter mine investment 
and increase project expenditures. 

In order to clarify the cost of land- 
use restrictions on phosphate mining, two 
case studies of potentially significant 
resource areas (Florida's wetlands and 
certain Western Federal lands) under gov- 
ernment land-management controls are 
examined here. 



The Florida Department of Environmental 
Regulation and the Southwest Florida 
Water Management District control access 
to phosphate resources in wetland areas 
through their dredge and fill permitting 
authority (9). Currently, such permits 
are granted only for wetland areas pre- 
viously modified by agriculture or other 
land-use activities. This policy applies 
to all wetland areas, including those on 
tracts already purchased by mining com- 
panies. Wetland reclamation techniques 
proposed by the industry presently are 
viewed as unproved by the State (22). 

An attempt was made in this study to 
identify some of the potential costs of 
prohibiting phosphate rock mining on wet- 
lands and other environmentally sensitive 
areas of Florida. These costs, identi- 
fied in terms of resources relinquished, 
were determined by (1) surveying all 
phosphate rock, mining companies in Flor- 
ida to determine their reserves on wet- 
lands, and (2) assessing the phosphate 
reserves on Florida lands that were 
designated as environmentally sensitive 
in the Bureau of Mines Minerals Availa- 
bility System (MAS). The results of 
these efforts are described below. 



Florida Wetlands 

Certain parts of Florida known as wet- 
lands provide an excellent example of 
phosphate rock resource areas where min- 
ing activities are very restricted and, 
in some cases, entirely prohibited by 
State environmental protection agencies. 
These wetlands are low, water-saturated 
areas (such as swamp and marsh) that 
serve as wildlife habitats and protect 
water quality. Florida contains over 
20 percent of all U.S. wetlands, which 
are gradually being eliminated (at a 
rate of about 50 square miles per year) 
by encroaching development, especially 
urbanization, highway construction, 
and agriculture (39). Consequently, 
there is strong opposition to mining 
phosphate rock in these areas of the 
State (57). 



The Survey 

In March 1982, all 15 phosphate rock 
mining companies in Florida were re- 
quested to furnish their estimates of 
recoverable phosphate rock that would be 
lost if the State prohibited mining with- 
in wetland areas on their properties. 
Every company responded with estimates of 
their reserve base 15 in wetland areas and 
in all of the properties they owned. 
This information revealed that the total 
reserve base in wetlands owned by the 
companies amounted to 458 million tons, 
or approximately 17 percent of all their 
holdings. The wetlands contained 3 to 55 
percent of the reserve base owned by in- 
dividual companies. 

I^see table 1 for definition of "re- 
serve base." 



24 



The total wetland tonnage on company 
lands equates to about 11 years of domes- 
tic consumption at 1981 demand levels. 
With a conservative appraisal of $1 per 
ton of reserve base, the same assessment 
given in a 1978 study (6^), tonnage would 
be valued at $458 million. If produced, 
the value of this tonnage (at average 
f.o.b. mine prices in 1981) could in- 
crease to at least $12 billion. More- 
over, the quantity and value of wetland 
resources discussed here does not include 
additional amounts of phosphate rock, that 
may be in other wetland areas not on mine 
company properties, nor do these esti- 
mates include phosphate rock that may be 
in wide buffer zones around wetland areas 
where mining also may be excluded. 

Many factors (such as ore grade and 
depth) must be considered before it is 
assumed that the reserves in all wetland 
areas can be mined economically if access 
were permitted. In addition, the re- 
serves in the areas discussed here 
account for less that one-fifth of total 
Florida phosphate reserves. Neverthe- 
less, the magnitude of reserves relin- 
quished in the wetlands reveals the need 
to consider the potential for such losses 
when evaluating the cost of environmental 
regulations that prohibit mining. 

MAS Evaluation 

Data from the MAS covering 79 mine 
properties in Florida were used to fur- 
ther clarify the amount of phosphate rock 
reserves that may be on environmentally 
sensitive lands in the States, and 
thereby could be subject to mining re- 
strictions. For each developed and un- 
developed property, the MAS evaluates the 
sensitivity of the natural environment to 
mining. This evaluation is given for 
specific features (vegetation, water, 
wildlife, etc.), and includes estimates 
of persistence as well as degree of im- 
pact (significant, moderate, etc.). 

Ten of fifty-one undeveloped Florida 
phosphate properties examined in the MAS 
are designated as lands with a "signifi- 
cant" or "extreme" environmental sensi- 
tivity to mining. Although the actual 
impact of future mining may prove to be 



more moderate, this current perception 
of significant or extreme environmental 
disturbance is important because such 
perceptions among the general public or 
regulatory officials could be a major ob- 
stacle in obtaining permission to mine 
deposits on these properties. According 
to the MAS, the 10 properties contain 557 
million tons of phosphate rock. 16 This 
amount could have a product value of at 
least $15 billion (based on average 1981 
f.o.b. mine prices), and equals 26 per- 
cent of the reserves on all the undevel- 
oped mine properties identified by the 
MAS. 17 

Both the company survey and the MAS 
exercise support the contention that 
environmental protection laws prohibiting 
mining could significantly affect the 
phosphate rock industry in Florida. com- 
paratively little MAS data on phosphate 
rock properties outside Florida precluded 
a similar evaluation of other States at 
the time of this report. However, it was 
observed that only a few of these proper- 
ties were identified in MAS as suscep- 
tible to significant environmental damage 
from mining. 

Western Federal Lands 



The total amount of phosphate rock re- 
sources on the Federal domain, and there- 
fore the quantity subject to national 
land management controls, is not pre- 
cisely known. However, similarities in 
the distribution of phosphate reserves 
and public lands suggests that such con- 
trols should be considered in the devel- 
opment of the reserves in Western States. 
Table 4 illustrates that, although only a 
small portion of domestic phosphate pro- 
duction currently is drawn from Federal 
lands, large phosphate resources are in 
Western States where there is extensive 
Federal land ownership. 

^^Based on a valuation of $ 1 per ton, 
this tonnage would be worth $557 million. 

^ ^Another study concluded that 27 per- 
cent of Florida phosphate rock reserves 
in 1978 were on land judged to be signif- 
icantly and/or extremely sensitive to 
mining (57) . 



25 



TABLE 4. - Federal land ownership in States with significant phosphate rock, 
production and reserves 



State 



Florida 

North Carolina. 

Utah 

Wyoming 

Idaho 

Tennessee. . . . . . 



1981 production, ' 
million tons 



47.2 

45.6 
1.6 



Reserve base^^ 
million tons 



{ I: 



590 
290 
831 
690 
235 
29 



Percent of State 

acreage owned by 

Federal Government ^ 



12 
7 
64 
49 
64 
7 



'Stowasser (30). 

2mAS data. 

3BLM (38). 

4 Includes minor output in Alabama and Montana. 



Most of the lands of Idaho, Utah, and 
Wyoming (which contain one-third of the 
total U.S. reserve base shown in table 1) 
are managed by Federal land agencies. 
Approximately 25 percent of the phosphate 
outcrop areas in Utah are on Federal 
lands (21). In fact, virtually all known 
and suspected phosphate rock deposits in 
the Western States are on or near the 
Federal domain. Thus, environmental pol- 
icies that preclude further mining on 
these lands could seriously limit the 
development of Western phosphate rock 
resources. Such limits on mining cannot 
be ignored if these resources are to 
be a credible alternative to Eastern 
production. 

In addition to the mineral resources 
left unexploited when mining is prohib- 
ited, companies may encounter delays 
while negotiating with Federal land 
agencies for access to deposits. Poli- 
cies concerned with environmental degra- 
dation often lead to lengthy government 
assessments of resource values and op- 
tions. The resulting delays reportedly 
can exceed 2 years, and may extend mine 
project completion time by more than 40 
percent (21). Among the problems cited 
by industry are "insistence on supplying 
voluminous data not required by regula- 
tion, undue interference in claim devel- 
opment, exceeding authority under the 
regulations, refusal to approve operation 
plans because of busy schedules, and 
staffing turnovers which require new 
initiatives to speed approvals" (21). 



Federal decisions regarding the dis- 
position of phosphate rock leases in the 
Osceola National Forest in Florida and 
national forest lands in Idaho have been 
pending for nearly 15 years. Also, long- 
proposed phosphate leases in the Los 
Padres National Forest of California may 
not be resolved in this decade (50) . 
Such lengthy lead times to open a new 
mine increase the risk of investors by 
making them more vulnerable to changes in 
economic conditions as well as altera- 
tions in contractual terms stipulated by 
the government (26) . Since 1972 and 
1974, when Environmental Impact State- 
ments were initiated for phosphate mining 
in the Osceola and Idaho National For- 
ests, mine investment costs (according to 
changes in the Producer Price Index) have 
grown by 136 percent and 70 percent, 
respectively. Presumably, such increased 
costs eventually would be passed on the 
consumers in the form of higher prices. 
How much these higher prices might reduce 
industry competitveness is uncertain. (A 
related discussion of delays in mine per- 
mitting follows later in this chapter.) 

MINE RECLAMATION COSTS 

The cost of reclaiming phosphate rock 
mined land varies considerably, princi- 
pally as a function of earthmoving (i.e. , 
volume and distance) and revegetation 
(i.e. , seed, saplings and topsoil) re- 
quirements (55). Ultimately, these 
requirements, and the consequent reclama- 
tion costs, depend on the type of mined 



26 



land involved and the use intended for 
the reclaimed land. For example, the 
cost of reclaiming a phosphate rock mine 
site for pasture can be as little as $600 
per acre, but the cost of reclaiming the 
same area for residential housing can be 
more than $2,000 per acre. 

Table 5 illustrates the minimum recla- 
mation costs reported for various types 
of phosphate-rock-mined lands in Florida. 
A 1978 report indicated that such costs 
translated into incremental costs of 
about $0.37 per ton of product at exist- 
ing operations and $0.46 to $0.62 per ton 
of product at new mines (19). These 
estimates are corroborated by two other 
reports (18 , 57). Average reclamation 
costs in 1982 are estimated to be $3,000 
to $4,000 per acre (55). 

TABLE 5. - Cost of reclaiming various 
types of phosphate rock mine lands 
in Florida (59) 



Land t ype 

Clay settling areas 

Mined-out areas 

Hydraulically mined areas.. 

Sand tailings areas 

Other areas 



Average cost 
per acre 

$2,117 

1,022 

563 

1,330 

2,472 



Reclamation costs at an Idaho phosphate 
rock mine are shown in table 6. The mine 
operator claims that his total reclama- 
tion costs are within $50 to $100 of 
those of other Western phosphate rock 
mines. 

TABLE 6. - Reclamation costs at an Idaho 
phosphate rock mine (5) 





Cost per acre 


Grading and contouring 

(3:1 slopes) 

Topsoil 


'$150 
250 


Fertilizer 


100 


Seed 


100 






Total 


600 



'Grading some waste dumps 
Idaho mine reportedly cost 
$2,500. 



at another 
more than 



In lieu of a wide range of costs such 
as those in tables 5 and 6, an average 
cost of $750 per acre reportedly had been 
used for reclamation planning in the late 
1970 's (^8). 

CURRENT AND POTENTIAL WASTE 
DISPOSAL COSTS 

Solid Wastes 

Costs of solid waste disposal at phos- 
phate rock mines are difficult to differ- 
entiate from the water pollution control 
costs discussed earlier because the dis- 
posal and water treatment operations are 
interdependent; e.g., solid wastes such 
as overburden and sand tailings are used 
to build settling pond dams where process 
water is treated by removing other solid 
wastes. Consequently, very few studies 
make a clear distinction between solid 
waste disposal costs and wastewater 
treatment costs. However, a 1979 study, 
which identified these costs separately, 
reported that the cost of solid waste 
disposal for Florida phosphate mines was 
$0.13 per ton of product at existing 
plants and $0.41 per ton at new plants 
(19) . Disposal costs undoubtedly have 
increased since the report. A study in 
1978 revealed that water reclamation and 
waste disposal costs together accounted 
for 1 to 2 percent of total capital in- 
vestment for mining and benef iciation in 
Florida (57). 

Presumably, solid waste disposal costs 
at phosphate rock mines would escalate if 
the Resource Conservation and Recovery 
Act of 1976 were applied to domestic min- 
ing. However, published studies of pre- 
cise costs are not yet available. An EPA 
study of phosphate mining wastes mandated 
by recent amendments to the act will in- 
clude some cost estimates of standard 
measures to monitor and/or mitigate the 
impact of these wastes (15) . Although 
the finished study is not required by 
Congress until October 1983, a draft re- 
port may be available for review early in 
the year. 



27 



Radioactive Wastes 

As noted in chapter 2, radiation con- 
trol standards for phosphate rock mining 
conceivably could be issued in the near 
future under the hazardous waste provi- 
sions of the Resource Conservation and 
Recovery Act. Under jurisdiction of 
these provisions, the industry would be 
subject to all the attendant requirements 
for control, monitoring, recordkeeping, 
and reporting. The phosphate industry 
contends that such requirements would 
cost "literally millions of dollars" (9^). 

If regulations were developed for con- 
trolling exposure to low-level radiation 
at phosphate mines and on reclaimed land, 
substantial compliance costs should be 
expected because of the extensive solid 
waste and slime pond areas involved. In 
1979, an EPA report concluded that capi- 
tal costs for radiation controls at a 
representative Florida mine and benefici- 
ation plant would be at least $2 million, 
with annual operating and maintenance 
exceeding $600,000 (33). The same report 
indicates that an additional cost of 
$1,100 per acre is needed to reduce ex- 
posure levels on reclaimed land. Other 
estimates by the EPA indicate that build- 
ing homes on reclaimed land to adequately 
protect residents from low-level radia- 
tion would increase construction costs by 
at least $2,500 to $3,500 per 1,000 
square feet of ground floor area (47). 
The industry maintains that the projected 
costs for radiation controls are under- 
estimated (53). 

Despite research such as that cited 
here and in chapter 2, there is not 
enough information to predict potential 
radiation control costs with any preci- 
sion. Nevertheless, much published re- 
search reviewed for this study suggests 
that these costs could amount to several 
million dollars per mine. 

MINE PERMITTING COSTS 

In addition to the costs of meeting the 
environmental standards discussed thus 



far, the cost of the regulatory pro- 
cess itself deserves attention. The 
regulatory process referred to here con- 
sists of the procedures that a company 
must follow to gain authorization (per- 
mits) for mining from government agen- 
cies. These procedures often are 
governed by environmental protection 
policies, and entail two costs for the 
permit applicant: (1) the expenditures 
to obtain permits, and (2) the time 
needed to gain all necessary permits. 
These two cost categories are reviewed 
below. 

Cash Expenditures 

Table 7 itemizes the cash costs of 
applying for permits to open a new mine 
in Florida. It is estimated that the 
costs shown have nearly doubled since 
they were first published in 1978 ( 4^) • 
Various cost models for Florida phosphate 
mines indicate that such environmental 
permitting expenditures equal about 
1 percent of total capital investment for 
mining and benef iciation (57). 

Officials and consultants of phos- 
phate mining companies in Idaho and Utah 
report that total permitting costs 
for recent mine expansion projects 
ranged from $50,000 to $350,000 (_5, 16). 
They believe that these costs would not 
differ greatly from analogous costs 
for new Western mines. The discrep- 
ancy between the reported Western 
costs and the higher costs shown in 
table 7 is partly due to the misallo- 
cation of some Florida costs (e.g., 
"ground water" and "clay studies" listed 
in the table support mine development 
as well as permit requirements and, 
therefore, should not be wholly as- 
cribed to permitting). However, the 
greater number of permit requirements in 
Florida, especially at the county 
and regional levels (chapter 2) suggests 
that permitting costs there usu- 
ally are higher than in the Western 
States. 



28 



TABLE 7. - Cost of applying for phosphate mine permits in Florida (57) 

Average prestartup cost' 

Monitoring, including studies and reports: 

Radiation monitoring $25 ,000 

Fluoride, SO2 , particulate 100,000 

Water quality 50,000 

Clay studies 20,000 

Stream flow 50,000 

Biological and archaeological surveys 50,000 

Ground water 350,000-1,500,000 

Surveys and phot ogramme try 25,000- 50,000 

Local and county permits: 

Mining ordinance (master plan)..... 75,000 

Building permit 5,000 

Mining permit 50 , 000 

Regional: 

Southwest Florida Water Management District: 

Water use 50,000 

Works of district 10,000 

DRI 250,000 

State: 

Department of Environmental Regulation: 

Air 30,000 

HjG effluent 25,000 

Dredge and fill 50,000 

Sanitary H2O 500 

Dike construction... 75,000 

Department of Natural Resources Master Reclamation plan.. ' 50,000 

Federal: 

Environmental Protection Agency — National Pollutant 

Discharge Elimination System (EIS) 125,000 

Corps of Engineers — dredge and fill 25,000 

Oil spill prevention 2,500 

Air (significant deterioration) 15, 000 

Total $1 ,508,000-2,683,000 

'Excludes management, legal fees, and public relations. 

Time Requirements (table 8). Florida probably has the most 

diverse array of permitting agencies to 
Phosphate mine companies must apply to be found in any phosphate producing 
regulatory agencies at several levels of State. Nevertheless, the local-to- 
government for permits to initiate min- Federal hierarchy presented in table 8 
ing. Permits must be obtained from Fed- has parallels in every phosphate mining 
eral. State, and local agencies; approval region. 18 Also, proposals for mining on 
by regional (multi county) authorities is Federal lands must be approved by even 
necessary in some areas. Many of these more agencies (e.g., the Forest Service 
agencies are guided by environmental pro- and the Bureau of Land Management) than 
tection policies. those listed. 



In Florida, nearly two dozen permits 
must be granted by at least six agencies 
before phosphate mining can begin 



IScounty and local controls appear to 
be less strict in some Western mining 
areas. 



29 



TABLE 8. - Permits required for phosphate mining in Florida (^, 57 ) 

County and Regional Zoning change . 

Master plan approval. 

Development order. 

Operating permit. 

Building permit. 
State: 

Department of Environmental Regulation permits Mr quality. 

Industrial waste water. 

Dredge and fill. 

Drainage well. 

Dam construction. 

Potable water supply. 

Sanitary waste. 



Water Management District permits. 



Consumptive water use. 
Water well construction. 
Works of the district. 
Management and storage of sur- 
face waters. 



Department of Natural Resources Reclamation standards . 

Federal: 

Environmental Protection Agency National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (water 
quality) permit. 
Air quality standards. 

Army Corps of Engineers permit... Dredge and fill. 

Dam construction in waters of 
the United States. 



Several years are required to acquire 
all of the permits needed by a domestic 
producer to begin mining phosphate rock. 
Permitting for a new mine in Florida 
takes 4 to 5 years (39); a sample permit 
timetable is presented in table 9. 
Western phosphate mine operators report 
that the permitting process usually re- 
quires 2 to 3 years on private lands , 
assuming no litigation (_5, 18) . Permits 
for phosphate mining operations on Fed- 
eral lands can take about 3 to 5 years. 
For at least one Western mine expansion 
project, however, all permits were 
granted in less than 1 year (18) . 

The permitting process can be lengthy 
for several reasons. Although individual 



permitting agencies may respond quickly 
to a mining application, information 
requested by these agencies for their 
decisions can require years of data col- 
lection and analysis by the applicant. 
The time needed to prepare such informa- 
tion is multiplied when similar analyses 
must be repeated for different permitting 
agencies. In addition, permit applica- 
tion at one or more agencies are hindered 
if they are contingent on prior approval 
by another agency which has had its 
actions delayed. Further delays may 
be encountered when different regula- 
tory agencies have conflicting permit 
requirements. 



30 



TABLE 9. - Permitting schedule for a new phosphate mine in Florida (39) 



Regulatory agency and activity 



3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 



Time , months 



Southwest Florida Water Manage- 
ment District: 

Development work plan , 

Run pump tests , 

Prepare report , 

Environmental Protection Agency 
(EIS): 

Consultant 

Prepare plan of study ..., 

Collect baseline data , 

Preliminary EIS 

Draft EIS , 

Public comment , 

Final EIS and National Pol- 
lutant Discharge Elimination 
System , 

Application for Development Ap- 
proval (ADA) and DRI (Fla.): 

Prepare ADA and/or DRI , 

DRI review , 

Public hearing , 

Issue department order , 

County and Regional Planning 
Council: 

Prepare application , 

Application review. ........... 

Issue operating permit 

Department of Natural Resources 
(Fla.): 

Prepare conceptual plan 

Staff review 

Cabinet approval , 



As discussed earlier regarding Western 
Federal lands, lengthy regulatory delays 
entail certain costs and risks. At an 
annual inflation rate of 7 percent, costs 
can increase by as much as 40 percent in 
the 3- to 5-year period that a phosphate 
mining company must wait for all permits 
to begin mine construction. This situa- 
tion, coupled with the risk that new per- 
mitting problems can arise during such a 



long period, does not encourage mine in- 
vestment. If mining is deterred by de- 
lays in the permitting process, the for- 
gone opportunity costs would include the 
value of the unexploited mineral re- 
sources ; in some cases , such values may 
be more significant than any of the capi- 
tal and operating costs discussed thus 
far. 



31 



CHAPTER 4.— THE IMPACT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION CONTROLS 



This chapter examines the cumulative 
effects of the individual regulations and 
costs discussed thus far. Conclusions 
and recommendations regarding these ef- 
fects are presented at the end of the 
report. 

SUMMARY OF REGULATORY EFFECTS 

The preceding chapters and the studies 
cited below confirm that environmental 
protection controls have three immediate 
effects on domestic phosphate rock min- 
ing: The controls (1) increase capital 
and operating expenditures, (2) limit 
access to potentially significant mineral 
resources, and (3) can discourage invest- 
ment by increasing financial uncertainty 
and risk. Each of these effects and 
their consequences are examined in the 
following discussion. 

Increased Expenditures 

A study for the Nonfuel Mineral Policy 
Review conducted by the Department of the 
Interior in 1979 reported that environ- 
mental protection controls will account 
for approximately 8 to 10 percent of 
domestic phosphate rock production costs 
in this decade (18). Cost estimates from 
the study are presented in table 10.^^ 
Unpublished data obtained for this report 
from phosphate producers (35) and Bureau 
of Mines consultants (54, 58) indicate 
somewhat lower control costs which vary 
from 5 to 10 percent of total expenses at 
individual mines. 

'"a comparison of 1977 data in this 
table and in table 3 of chapter 3 shows 
that most of the costs are attributable 
to water quality controls . 



The estimates in table 10 do not in- 
clude all environmental costs. Not in- 
cluded, for example, are environmental 
assessment costs and permitting expendi- 
tures, which total several million dol- 
lars for each new mine, as previously 
explained. Moreover, the estimates in 
table 10 do not indicate potential costs 
associated with solid waste and radiation 
controls, which could be implemented in 
the next few years. Such controls were 
anticipated by those who forecast the 
expenses shown in table 10, but estimates 
of these control costs were considered 
too speculative for inclusion in their 
projections (18). Nevertheless, for the 
reasons given in chapter 3, investigators 
agree that radiation and solid waste reg- 
ulations could substantially increase 
future control costs at phosphate mines. 

As shown in table 10, environmental 
control costs are expected to increase in 
absolute terms , but are predicted to 
decline in relation to total phosphate 
mining expenditures during the 1980 's. 
The forecast decline is credible, how- 
ever, only if it is assumed that industry 
growth rates can exceed increases in con- 
trol costs. Phosphate mine companies 
reportedly have plans to open new mines 
in the next several years (29). In 
the 1970's, rapid expansion of phosphate 
mine capacity due to sharply increased 
world demand allowed the industry to 
absorb large pollution control costs by 
passing them on to an expanding market. 
Thus, authors of the mineral policy 
study theorize that renewed expansion 
of the phosphate fertilizer industry in 
the mid-1980's will help to mitigate 
the adverse impacts of new control 



TABLE 10. - Major environmental control costs and total production 
expenditures for domestic phosphate rock mining (18) 





1977 


1980 


1985 


1990 


Production costs million 1977 dollars.. 

Control costs ................. .do ........... 


702 

79 

11.2 


747 

72 

9.6 


865 

74 

8.6 


987 
77 


Control costs/production costs percent.. 


7.8 



32 



costs (18) . At present, however, world 
economic conditions and industry over- 
capacity offer little evidence that much 
expansion will occur. Even a study 
by the EPA has forecast minimal or no 
growth for U.S. phosphate mining in the 
1980's (46). 

There is no consensus regarding the 
precise impact that control costs have on 
the competitiveness of U.S. phosphate 
producers. Presumably, the costs de- 
picted in table 10 will be passed on as 
higher prices to consumers whenever 
possible; these prices could affect com- 
petitive positions. According to the 
minerals policy study noted above (18), 
environmental control costs could reduce 
the competitiveness of domestic produc- 
ers. A collateral report further con- 
tends that environmental costs will be a 
contributing factor in the growth of U.S. 
phosphate imports (21) . Conversely, 
other studies indicate that fertilizer 
price increases must be very large to 
diminish demand, and that the envi- 
ronmental control costs of phosphate 
producers "could be absorbed in the mar- 
ketplace" (_3, 50) . Despite these con- 
flicting assessments, it would not be 
prudent to underestimate the effects of 
the costs shown in table 10 because such 
costs could encourage foreign competitors 
not subject to corresponding expenses. 

Under a Bureau of Mines research grant 
in 1978, an attempt was made to measure 
certain effects of environmental control 
costs in the Florida phosphate mining 
industry (^) . The resulting calculations 
suggest that, if control costs cause one 
mining company to close, total income- 
expenditure losses in Florida and the 
Nation would be at least $124 million (in 
1976 dollars). Based on these computa- 
tions, it appears that such a closure 
could have an even greater impact on U.S. 
balance of payments ; a one-company shut- 
down would have reduced phosphate rock 
exports by $168 million (at 1975 prices.) 

Control costs also could affect invest- 
ment decisions by domestic phosphate pro- 
ducers according to a draft report for 
the Nonfuel Minerals Policy Review (21). 
According to this report, U.S. phosphate 



companies are only minimally involved in 
foreign operations (which are primarly 
Government-owned) , and therefore are not 
expected to invest abroad. However, the 
report states that some investment may 
shift to other domestic mining activi- 
ties, particularly in the West. 

Resource Restrictions 



Environmental protection policies and 
regulations that prohibit mining on vari- 
ous lands have gained attention in recent 
years as access to mineral resources has 
become more restricted. A review of the 
literature reveals that studies regarding 
these controls have focused on individual 
restrictions or relatively few deposits 
without recognizing the growing amount of 
resources affected by land-use regula- 
tions throughout the country. Land-use 
controls important to domestic phosphate 
mining are detailed in chapter 2. 

The Florida case study presented in 
chapter 3 demonstrates the degree of 
impact that land-use restrictions for 
environmental protection could have on 
domestic phosphate mining. (It should be 
noted that the industry survey and MAS 
exercise in the case study are only in- 
tended to be general indicators of scale 
in the absence of more precise informa- 
tion. ) The case study analysis indicates 
that environmental policies that prevent 
mining could affect the disposition of 
several hundred million tons of the phos- 
phate reserve base in Florida alone. 
This tonnage constitutes a sizable por- 
tion of company holdings, is probably 
worth at least several hundred million 
dollars, 20 and would satisfy domestic 
consumption for more than a decade at 
current demand levels. Additional de- 
tails regarding this analysis are pre- 
sented in chapter 3. 

The survey and MAS evaluation support 
the contention that environmental laws 
that prohibit mineral extraction could 
significantly restrict domestic phosphate 

^'^Based on a conservative appraisal of 
$1 per ton of reserve, the same assess- 
ment given in a 1978 study {6) • 



33 



mining, particularly in Florida. Many 
factors (such as ore grade) must be con- 
sidered before assuming that deposits in 
all of the restricted areas would be 
mined if access were permitted. However, 
the deposits are economically minable, 
and companies have expressed an interest 
in mining some of the restricted areas. 
Moreover, the magnitude of resources that 
could be relinquished under the restric- 
tions tested in the Florida case study 
emphasizes the need to fully consider the 
results of not exploiting significant 
resources before implementing environ- 
mental regulations that prevent mining. 

The Western lands case study in chap- 
ter 3 highlights the significance of Fed- 
eral environmental policies and regula- 
tions to domestic phosphate mining. The 
coincidence of Federal lands and phos- 
phate resource areas indicates that 
environmental controls governing access 
to minerals on the public domain could 
affect most of the known phosphate in 
Utah, Wyoming, and Idaho. In Idaho, min- 
ing firms have been seeking phosphate 
leases on Federal Lands for more than a 
decade. These States account for approx- 
imately one-third of the Nation's phos- 
phate reserve base (table 4). 

Uncertainty and Risk 

As shown in chapter 3, at least 3 to 5 
years normally are needed to acquire all 
of the government authorizations neces- 
sary to open a phosphate mine in the 
United States. Many mine permit require- 
ments prompted by environmental protec- 
tion policies and concerns lead to 
lengthy, expensive resource assessments 
and unexpected delays. 



not uncommon in other sectors of the 
minerals industry. Inexplicable permit- 
ting delays were the subject of many com- 
plaints registered by various mining 
firms in a public comment period for the 
Nonfuel Minerals Policy Review (21), 
Mining companies reported that it was not 
unusual to wait 2 years or more to re- 
ceive a prospecting permit, and that 
permitting delays had lengthened mine 
projects by as much as 42 percent (21, 
40) . Faced with such delays, mining 
firms are hesitant to engage in long- 
range planning. 

Phosphate mining companies have en- 
countered similar delays and uncertain- 
ties, which increase costs. At an annual 
inflation rate of 7 percent, mine devel- 
opment costs could increase by as much as 
40 percent in the 3 to 5 years that phos- 
phate companies usually must wait for all 
mine permits to be granted. In some 
cases, cost increases can be even more 
dramatic: Investment costs (according to 
the Producer Price Index) have grown by 
136 percent in the last 10 years that 
leases and permits have been pending for 
phosphate mining on Federal lands in 
Florida and Idaho. 

In addition to the implicit financial 
risks, other uncertainties are introduced 
by a lengthy permitting period. A phos- 
phate mine operator contacted for this 
report indicated that he believes the 
long permitting process increases possi- 
bilities for more changes in permit re- 
quirements that further add to costs. 
Such apprehension, coupled with the 
knowledge that mining may not be approved 
despite many permitting expenditures, is 
another disincentive for investors. 



During interviews conducted for this 
report, phosphate mine company repre- 
sentatives expressed anger and frustra- 
tion with the increased costs and uncer- 
tainties introduced by a long permitting 
process. An official of one firm asked 
why a single agency could not act as a 
clearinghouse for permits to coordinate 
all agencies involved, and thereby reduce 
permitting time. The views expressed are 



If investment is deterred by the per- 
mitting process, certain opportunity 
costs are incurred. These costs include 
the value of mineral resources relin- 
quished, unfulfilled employment poten- 
tial, production forgone, etc. Together, 
such costs may outweigh even the large 
capital and operating costs of environ- 
mental controls. 



34 



CONCLUSIONS 



The following can be concluded from the 
information and analyses presented in 
this report: 

1. Domestic phosphate mining has been 
confronted with substantial environmental 
control costs in the past decade and may 
be subject to large increases in such 
costs during the 1980' s. As noted ear- 
lier, environmental protection standards 
for new mines and potential regulations 
under provisions of the Resource Conser- 
vation and Recovery Act are the most 
probable sources of additional new con- 
trol costs. There is evidence that the 
phosphate mining industry may not be able 
to absorb new control costs as well as it 
did in the 1970's. Consequently, careful 
attention should be given to the adverse 
effects that additional control costs 
could have on U.S. phosphate mining dur- 
ing the next several years. 

2. Environmental protection controls 
introduce significant costs and disincen- 
tives to the development of new phosphate 
mine projects. Investment is discouraged 
when 5 years and millions of dollars are 
required to obtain a permit for mining. 
Examples of the financial risks and un- 
certainties induced by delays in current 
mine permitting procedures are given in 
chapters 3 and 4. By discouraging in- 
vestments, these subtle effects of the 
permitting process may prove to have 
greater impact on the industry than the 
obvious capital and operating costs for 
environmental controls. Thus, shorter 
and more efficient permitting practices 
are needed. 

3. Environmental policies governing 
land-use controls that prohibit mining 



have affected the disposition of sizable 
phosphate resources. As previously 
shown, impacted resources could total 
several hundred million tons in Florida 
alone. A review of pertinent literature 
reveals that studies of land-use re- 
strictions on phosphate mining tend to 
focus on limited policies or individual 
resource areas rather than on the 
cumulative effect of many restrictions 
throughout the country. The combined 
impact of these restrictions must be 
examined further in order to comprehend 
the total effect of mining prohibitions 
on the Nation's capacity to produce 
phosphate. 

4. The coincidence of Federal lands 
and Western phosphate rock resources 
indicates that environmental policies 
that prevent mining on the public domain 
are key factors that could significantly 
limit the development of those resources. 
Consequently, environmental controls that 
govern access to Federal lands must be 
considered carefully before it can be 
assumed that development of Western phos- 
phate resources will compensate for the 
production losses resulting from restric- 
tions on mining in the Eastern States. 

5. Although the precise effects of 
regulatory impacts on the competitveness 
of domestic phosphate mining are not well 
defined, it would be imprudent to ignore 
such impacts in view of the many costs 
described in this report. Regulations 
that account for approximately one-tenth 
of production costs, diminish access to 
resources, and retard investment are 
apt to encourage competition from for- 
eign producers not subject to similar 
restraints. 



REFERENCES 



35 



1. Abnor, J. S. COSMAR Phase II — The 
Mining Industry Responds. Min. Congr. 
J., V. 66, No. 5, May 1980, pp. 17-23. 

2. Alts, D. , and C. Haap. Private 
communication, June 1982; available upon 
request from D. Alts and C. Haap, U.S. 
Geol. Surv. , Reston, VA. 

3. Arthur D. Little, Inc. (Cambridge, 
MA). Economic Analysis of Interim Final 
and Proposed Effluent Guidelines — Mineral 
Mining and Processing Industry (U.S. 
EPA Report 230/l-74-059a) . July 1976, 
306 pp.; available for consultation at 
EPA Library, Washington, DC. 

4. Bunch, J. Private communication, 
June 1982; available upon request from J, 
Bunch, Zellars-Williams , Inc., Lakeland, 
FL. 



Washington, DC, Sept. 17, 1978, 41 pp.; 
available for consultation at Div. Miner- 
als Policy and Analysis, BuMines, Wash- 
ington, DC. 

10. Hearon, R. S. Phosphate and Flor- 
ida's Environment. Pres. at AIME Annual 
Meeting, Denver, CO, Feb. 28-Mar. 2, 
1978, 6 pp.; available for consultation 
at Div. Minerals Policy and Analysis, Bu- 
Mines, Washington, DC. 

11. Idaho. Idaho Surface Mining Act, 
as amended. Idaho Code, sec. 47, ch. 15, 
1980, 14 pp. 

12. Imhoff, E. A. An Analysis of 
Selected Laws and Governmental Programs 
in Florida as Related To Mineral Resource 
Management and Surface Mining. U.S. 
Geol. Surv. OFR 76-648, 1976, 41 pp. 



5. Bunderson, R. Private communica- 
tion, August 1982; available upon request 
from R. Bunderson, Stauffer Chemical Co. , 
Montpelier, ID. 



13. Johnson, W. , and J. Paone. Land 

Utilization and Reclamation in the Mining 

Industry, 1930-1980. BuMines IC 8862, 
1982, 22 pp. 



6. Canterbery, R. E. , C. W. Hale, and 
E. J. Nosari. Economic Impact of the 
Phosphate Rock. Industry on Selected Flor- 
ida Counties, Florida, and the United 
States. FL Resour. and Environ. Analysis 
Center, FL State Univ., Tallahassee, FL, 
September 1978, 98 pp. 

7. Engelmann, W. H. , and P. Watson. 
Mined-Land Reclamation in the South- 
eastern United States Phosphate District: 
A Review of Requirements With Biblio- 
graphy. 1982, 103 pp.; available for 
consultation at Twin Cities Res. Center, 
BuMines, Minneapolis, MN. 

8. Fertilizer Institute. Comments 
Concerning Proposed 40 CFR 60 in 44 FR 
54970. Feb. 14, 1980, 15 pp.; available 
for consultation at Div. Minerals Policy 
and Analysis, BuMines, Washington, DC. 

9. Gordon F. Palm and Associates, Inc. 
Major Environmental Concerns of the Flor- 
ida Phosphate Council. Pres. at Forum 
on Nonfuel Minerals Policy Review, 



14. Kirby, R. Private communication. 
May 1982; available upon request from R. 
Kirby, Office of Water Regulations and 
Standards, U.S. EPA, Washington, DC. 

15. Kline, W. Private communication, 
August 1982; available upon request from 
W. Kline, Office of Solid Waste, U.S. 
EPA, Washington, DC. 

16. McKuchen, S. Private communica- 
tion, June 1982; available upon request 
from S. McKuchen, St. Clair Research 
Inc., Los Angeles, CA. 

17. Mercer, D. Private communication, 
July 1982; available upon request from D. 
Mercer, Texas Gulf Chemical Co., Aurora, 
NC. 

18. Mitre Corp. (McLean, VA) . Non- 
fuel Minerals Policy Review — Environmen- 
tal Quality, Health, and Safety (U.S. EPA 
contract 68-01-5051), February 1980, 207 
pp.; available from from Mitre Corp., 
McLean, VA. (Document No. MTR-79W00088) . 



36 



19. National Academy of Sciences. 
Surface Mining of Non-coal Minerals , A 
Study of Mineral Mining From the Perspec- 
tive of the Surface Mining Control and 
Reclamation Act of 1977. Washington, DC, 
1979, 339 pp. 

20. North Carolina. Mining Act of 
1971, as amended. General Statutes of 
North Carolina, v. 2C, ch. 74, art. 7, 
1981, 24 pp. 

21. Office of the Assistant Secretary, 
Energy and Minerals. Background Papers: 
Draft for Public Review and Comment of 
the Report on Nonfuel Minerals Policy 
Review. U.S. Dep. Interior, Washington, 
DC, August 1979, 278 pp.; available from 
NTIS, PB 80-117674. 

22. Porter, S. State Officials Take 
Look at Wetlands Reclamation Effort. 
Ledger, Lakeland, FL, Mar. 25, 1982, 
p. 2b. 

23. Schaefer, R. K. , W. G. Dupree, 
T. G. Clarke, K. Young. Energy Resources 
on Federally Administered Lands, U.S. 
Dep. Interior, Washington, DC, 1981, 
254 pp. 

24. Science Applications Inc. (McLean, 
VA) . The Influence of Mining Health and 
Safety and Environmental Legislation on 
Selected Domestic Metallic and Nonmetal- 
lic Minerals (BuMines contract J0177124), 
December 1978, 185 pp.; available from 
NTIS, PB 80-131436. 

25. Smith, R. Private communication, 
June 1982; available upon request from R. 
Smith, Div. Miner. Resour. , Bur. Land 
Management, Washington, DC. 

26. Sousa, L. J. The U.S. Copper 
Industry — Problems, Issues, and Outlook. 
BuMines Mineral Issues, 1981, 86 pp. 

27. Stark, C. Private communication, 
June 1982; available upon request from C. 
Stark, Mississippi Chemical Co., Yazoo 
City, MS. 

28. Stevens, R. Private communica- 
tion, June 1982; available upon request 
from R. Stevens, Mobile Chemical Co., 
Richmond, VA. 



29. Stowasser, W. F. Phosphate Rock. 
BuMines Minerals Commodity Profile, 1982, 
67 pp. 

30. . Phosphate Rock. Bu- 
Mines Minerals Yearbook 1981, v. 1, 
pp. 649-666. 

31. . Phosphate Rock. Ch. in 

Mineral Facts and Problems, 1980 Edition. 
BuMines B 671, 1981, pp. 663-682. 

32. . Private communication, De- 
cember 1982; available upon request 
from W. F. Stowasser, BuMines, Washing- 
ton, DC. 

33. Teknekron Research, Inc. (McLean, 
VA). Technical Support for the Evalua- 
tion and Control of Emissions of Radio- 
active Material to Ambient Air (U.S. EPA 
contract 68-01-5142), May 1981, 72 pp.; 
available from EPA, Office of Radiation 
Programs, Washington, DC. 

34. Tennessee. Tennessee Surface Min- 
ing Law of 1972, as amended. Tennessee 
Code, title 59, ch. 59, January 1982, 
6 pp. 

35. Tubbs, S. A. (Florida Phosphate 
Council). Personal communication, June 
1982; available for consultation at Div. 
Minerals Policy and Analysis, BuMines, 
Washington, DC. 

36. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 
Final Environmental Statement — Hookers 
Prairie Phosphate Mine, Polk County, 
Florida, W. R. Grace and Co., Jackson- 
ville, FL, June 1980, 284 pp. 



37. 



Final Environmental Impact 



Statement — North Carolina Phosphate Cor- 
poration. Wilmington, NC, May 1977, 
607 pp. 

38. U.S. Bureau of Land Management 
(Dep. Interior). Public Land Statis- 
tics — 1980. Washington, DC, 1981, 
191 pp. 

39. U.S. Bureau of Mines. The Flor- 
ida Phosphate Industry's Technological 
and Environmental Problems, A Review. IC 
8914, 1982, 58 pp. 



37 



40. U.S. Congress, Office of Technol- 
ogy Assessment. Management of Fuel and 
Nonfuel Minerals on Federal Land. Wash- 
ington, DC, April 1979, 435 pp. 



50. U.S. General Accounting Office. 
Phosphate: A Case Study of a Valuable, 
Depleting Mineral in America. Washing- 
ton, DC, November 1979, 71 pp. 



41. . Plans and Outline for Wet- 
lands Report, May 1982, 38 pp.; avail- 
able for consultation at Div. Minerals 
Policy and Analysis, BuMines , Washington, 
DC. 

42. U.S. Department of the Interior. 
Final Report of the Task Force on the 
Availability of Federally Owned Mineral 
Lands. Washington, DC, 1977, 103 pp. 

43. U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency. Final Rule — Mineral Mining and 
Processing Point Source Category. Feder- 
al Register, v. 42, No. 133, July 12, 
1977, 10 pp. 



44. 

and Processing 



Final Rule — Mineral Mining 
Point Source Category — 



Standards of Performance for New Sources. 
Federal Register, v. 43, No. 48, Mar. 10, 
1978, 3 pp. 

45. . Phosphate Rock Plants — 

Background Information for Promulgated 
Standards. Office of Air, Noise, and 
Radiation, Research Triangle Park, NC, 
April 1982, 49 pp. 



46. 



Phosphate Rock Plants — 



Background Information for Proposed Stan- 
dards. Office of Air Quality Planning 
and Standards, Research Triangle Park, 
NC, September 1979, 375 pp. 

47. . A Preliminary Evaluation 

of the Control of Indoor Radon Daughter 
Levels in New Structures. Office of Ra- 
diation Programs, Washington, DC, Novem- 
ber 1976, 78 pp. 

48. . Reconnaissance Study of 

Radiochemical Pollution From Phosphate 
Rock Mining and Milling. National Field 
Investigation Center, Denver, CO, Decem- 
ber 1973, 83 pp. 

49. . Standards of Performance 

for Stationary Sources; Phosphate Rock 
Plants. Federal Register, v. 47, No. 74, 
Apr. 16, 1982, 9 pp. 

irU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1983-605-015/38 



51. Walker, E. Private communication, 
June 1982; available upon request from E. 
Walker, North Carolina Phosphate Corp., 
Beaufort County, NC. 

52. Wang, K. L. , B. W. Klein, and 
A. F. Powell. Economic Significance of 
the Florida Phosphate Industry. BuMines 
IC 8653, 1974, 51 pp. 

53. Wells, G. Private communication. 
May and June 1982; available upon request 
from G. Wells, Fertilizer Inst,, Washing- 
ton, DC. 

54. Williams, J. M. Private communi- 
cation, April 1982; available upon re- 
quest from J. Williams , Zellars-Williams , 
Inc., Lakeland, FL. 

55. Windom, S. Private communication, 
June 1982; available upon request from S. 
Windom, FL Dep. Environ. Regulation, Tal- 
lahassee, FL. 

56. Yulverton, F. Private communica- 
tion, June 1982; available upon request 
from F. Yulverton, U.S. Army Corps Eng. , 
Wilmington, NC. 

57. Zellars-Williams, Inc. (Lakeland, 
FL). Evaluation of the Phosphate Depos- 
its of Florida Using the Minerals Avail- 
ability System (BuMines contract 
J0377000), June 1978, 196 pp.; available 
from NTIS, PB 286-648. 

58. . Evaluation of the Phos- 
phate Deposits of Florida Using the Min- 
erals Availability System. Draft report. 
May 1978, 105 pp.; available for consul- 
tation at BuMines, Div. Minerals Policy 
and Analysis, Washington, DC. 

59. Zellars-Williams, Inc. (Lakeland, 
FL) and Conservation Consultants , Inc. 
(Palmetto, FL). Evaluation of pre- 
July 1, 1975 Disturbed Phosphate Lands. 
August 1980, 107 pp.; available for con- 
sultation at Div. Minerals Policy and 
Analysis, BuMines, Washington, DC. 

INT.-BU.OF MINES, PGH., PA. 25856 



H3^ «^ 










%. 




^ -^ 









/\ 




^> 






^ ^ 

-^a^ 
.^°-^. 



1-^ V 



•Trr.'- 0' 




^O G° 






,'^\... 















6^^>.. 




o. 



«-iq* 



'o V 




















' o5-' 










65' '^ 






v-^;^ 
.^^V 






^^ ,4>^ "-^^ '-!^^/ . -^^ ^^ 




1 •^■V 











" ■<?•, 



^/^- t*'' 





















'. ^^^ i. 







>"'^^. 




"^-^^ 



■^p. "o 









4>-'\ 



'p. 4 



^oV^ 



' '#'. 4 



.5.^^ 



'<^. ^o""' .4- 






• ^^"^ 














^o-v ; 




' ^. 4 „* 









.40. 



, , 4-*^ °^ 








q. *.,!• 




"h^ 



' 0^ 



^°-n*.. 








^oV 



'^0^ 

.-^q* 



'bV 



"> 













.s^ <V 




'' ^-^v..^^ :miM^ "^-.c.^* o'Bl^v %,^^ ,*' 



^'\r^. 






V„ c-^v" . 






V.^"^ 


















'bv" 



^°-n^. 




0^ 



o«». %> 







V >• -^ » - o , A - . v> 










* •^. 4 













"W^ ^ 



r.° .'^''"<^. =mf^. .^-„ :^&^.- ..v^. 















lei 










.,^*\-J^' 










"#* A> . . . 



- ,.- ^w^^ -v. . c°%ai:'>o y.c;^/\ co^a;^°o /\v: 









'bV 



^ 



^* «o 






^°:-."'^. .A^^v;,^,^^^ ^. ..^\'A*i:.X .^^^!^^v% v^\^r-.-^q. .o^,-..% 



s' A <r 






■■ „*' 






syfiK 



^" .v-^^ -mm: «,^^V ^•^H'/ .^'-V. W/^: .^'-^ 




■i', 4 




K^ ^ ^'- -^ ^ ^'^^^^^;* .^^' "<>, 



^* . ^' 



o V 



;* .4^ "* 



x^r,. 



' V> 4 * 






















%,** •^'•- x.^*^ .•^•.. %,** •»'■- \/ .-M- \/ .*:« 






- 1 • * - ^O ^^ c ° " " ♦ «• 



\/'y^ 

















\/ 









^ -oV^^ =^ 



? t^4^^ \ 



Q. -.-N^^^.. ^0 > .J^^^* J" o 











O^ *o„o' ^0 





^^-^^^ V 










C°\^ 












<^^. '- 




.^-^ 



■.* 



.^^ o_ 










•^^ ^^■^ *^ 






.^■^ .• 




'P) ■i * 4 



'^0 

-t V -1* 







»o' ^O'' 





















DEC 83 



WEW N. MANCHESTER, 
INDIANA 46962 









; -n^o^ ;^ 







. •"> « <i>. 




III^M^^^^ 




.sL.^ 




,«-• 



